Tell me about the Trinity

[blü 2]

I linked a couple of articles here that might help:
Tell me about the Trinity

To be honest, I don't bother trying to rationalize or overthink everything anymore. Yes, I believe in the Trinity but don't pretend to know the fine workings of it all. I don't view knowing the details as necessary, anyway.

Thanks, I missed that first time round.

You linked article says:

Dyothelitism means that Jesus possesses two wills, one divine and one human. God the Father and God the Son are distinct persons, but they share the same divine will.
​

But if they have only a single divine will, in what sense are they different divine persons, rather than different manifestations of the one person?

(As I said earlier, I don't think this is a problem in the NT, where each of the Jesuses of Paul, Mark, Matthew, Luke and John expressly denies he's God and never claims to be God. The confusion arises only when the Trinity doctrine is devised in the 4th century CE.)

 

[metis]

No, Jesus is God in Trinitarianism.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...x-Shield-Trinity-Scutum-Fidei-English.svg.png

There has to be at least some separation between them as we do have different names for them, which we wouldn't have if they were all exactly identical. That Jesus said that he didn't know when the end of times would be, and that only the Father knows for sure when that will be, is also telling us that they are not entirely the same.

Catholic theology frequently uses the Aristotle concept of "essence", not only with the Trinitarian concept but also with the Eucharist. "Essence" does not mean symbolic-- it means that it is integral in an abstract way, much like an automobile is not just a sum of its physical parts, as it's purpose is probably even more important.

In the "History of the Catholic Church" by James Hitchcock, he spends a lot of time on this and with the formation of the Nicene Creed, and it's considered to be an excellent source of detailed information that has been heavily praised by Catholic theologians and clergy alike.

Have a Most Blessed Lord's Day.

 

[truthseeker7]

Thanks for that.

Unfortunately it doesn't address the question about the Christian Trinity doctrine that I was asking.

The Trinity doctrine, unlike the example you've given, says that the one God exists as one substance and three persons. However, according to the doctrine, and in defiance of sense, each of the three persons is God ─ not one third of God, not one of the three members of the board of God Corp, not one of the three God Partners, but each is 100% of God. Yes, 100% + 100% + 100% = 300% = 3 gods ─ but the doctrine denies that outcome. That's why its own theologians call it "a mystery in the strict sense", which means that "it can neither be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed" ─ a polite way of admitting it's incoherent.

The aspect that I'm trying to clarify in this thread is whether the three persons ever disagree with each other ie exercise an independent will. If they do, that would seem to confirm there were three gods, not one; and if they don't, if they have only the one will between them, that would seem to confirm that they were only one person as well as only one God.

you see now that is the Christian doctine

our father, who ART IN HEAVEN, the skies, it is the celestial sun

The SUN is the human personification of the sun-AS ABOVE,SO BELOW

the Holy spirit controls the suns soul on us and the astral man with the zodiac, it also will unlock the seven seals for us

they are all the sun

 

[blü 2]

you see now that is the Christian doctine

our father, who ART IN HEAVEN, the skies, it is the celestial sun

The SUN is the human personification of the sun-AS ABOVE,SO BELOW

the Holy spirit controls the suns soul on us and the astral man with the zodiac, it also will unlock the seven seals for us

they are all the sun

Thanks for the clarification.

But the question in the OP is the issue I'm concerned with, and it arises from the specific form of the Christian Trinity doctrine:

If Jesus and the Ghost have only the same will as the Father, how can they be regarded as separate persons?

And if each has [his] own will, how can they not be regarded as three gods?

 

[Katzpur]

I find the expression "God's will" is used very commonly in Christian conversation.

So I ask ─

Does Jesus have a will independent of and distinguishable from the Father's will?

Yes.

Does the Ghost?

If so, which of those does 'God's will' mean?

They are all in agreement, but not because they have only one "shared" will. (I'm not a Trinitarian Christian, though. Maybe you wanted responses only from Trinitarian Christians.)

 

[Katzpur]

And if each of the three persons in fact has a distinct will, in what sense are they not three gods?

In one sense, they are three gods or three "divine persons." This more or less freaks Trinitarian Christians out, though it really shouldn't. The word "God" (capitalized when used by Christians) is a title referring to the deity Christians worship. It can be accurately applied to any of the three distinct personages within the Godhead, in which case it would be used as a singular noun. It can also be used as a collective noun, referring to all three personages as a single unit (such as a team, a jury, or a committee).

There are actually numerous instances where the word "one" is found in the scriptures denoting a unity which is not physical:

Exodus 24:3 "And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do."

2 Corinthians 13:11 "Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you."

Acts 4:32 "And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common."

I would say that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost each have their own will, but as in the above examples, they are "of one will."

 

[Mike.Hester]

Everyone is still arguing over the same topic supposedly settled at the Council of Nicaea.

 

[Katzpur]

Everyone is still arguing over the same topic supposedly settled at the Council of Nicaea.

If you mean the nature of God, yes, it was settled by majority rule of a group of men convened at the insistence of a pagan emperor. And of course their conclusion didn't really settle anything, because God is who He is, regardless of what human beings decide He is.

 

[blü 2]

In one sense, they are three gods or three "divine persons." This more or less freaks Trinitarian Christians out, though it really shouldn't. The word "God" (capitalized when used by Christians) is a title referring to the deity Christians worship. It can be accurately applied to any of the three distinct personages within the Godhead, in which case it would be used as a singular noun. It can also be used as a collective noun, referring to all three personages as a single unit (such as a team, a jury, or a committee).

There are actually numerous instances where the word "one" is found in the scriptures denoting a unity which is not physical:

Exodus 24:3 "And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do."

2 Corinthians 13:11 "Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you."

Acts 4:32 "And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common."

I would say that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost each have their own will, but as in the above examples, they are "of one will."

Thanks. But those are metaphors ─ "to be of one mind" or "heart" or "soul" means simply to agree and to avoid fights and internal divisions.

And ─ as you say ─ it's not what the Trinity doctrine says, whereas it's the Trinity doctrine that I'm concerned with here.

Under the Trinity doctrine, each of Father, Jesus and Ghost is a "person" made of "one substance". The claimed result is that each of Father, Son and Ghost is both a distinct person and IS God ─ not a fraction of God, not a representative of God, but the entirety of God. Since 100% + 100% + 100% = 300% = 3 gods, the result is incoherent, and this is admitted, by calling it "a mystery in the strict sense" (which means that "it cannot be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, and cannot be cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed" ─ their words, not mine).

But here I'm addressing a further internal contradiction, as set out in the OP: if each of Father, Jesus and Ghost has [his] own will, then this will be demonstrated by disagreement (since having your own will and always agreeing with Father is not having your own will). If there's only Father's will, then there's only one entity, which has three manifestations (the Trinity doctrine denies the persons are simply manifestations of God, each being the entirety of God). If indeed Jesus and the Ghost actually disagree with each other and with the Father ─ exercise an individual will ─ then there are three gods, not one.


By way of footnote, I doubt one Christian in a thousand has a clue about these technicalities. I've never heard any sermon go even close to discussing the problems, let alone acknowledging the churches' own admission that the whole thing is incoherent.

 

[Katzpur]

Thanks. But those are metaphors ─ "to be of one mind" or "heart" or "soul" means simply to agree and to avoid fights and internal divisions.

And ─ as you say ─ it's not what the Trinity doctrine says, whereas it's the Trinity doctrine that I'm concerned with here.

Under the Trinity doctrine, each of Father, Jesus and Ghost is a "person" made of "one substance". The claimed result is that each of Father, Son and Ghost is both a distinct person and IS God ─ not a fraction of God, not a representative of God, but the entirety of God. Since 100% + 100% + 100% = 300% = 3 gods, the result is incoherent, and this is admitted, by calling it "a mystery in the strict sense" (which means that "it cannot be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, and cannot be cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed" ─ their words, not mine).

But here I'm addressing a further internal contradiction, as set out in the OP: if each of Father, Jesus and Ghost has [his] own will, then this will be demonstrated by disagreement (since having your own will and always agreeing with Father is not having your own will). If there's only Father's will, then there's only one entity, which has three manifestations (the Trinity doctrine denies the persons are simply manifestations of God, each being the entirety of God). If indeed Jesus and the Ghost actually disagree with each other and with the Father ─ exercise an individual will ─ then there are three gods, not one.


By way of footnote, I doubt one Christian in a thousand has a clue about these technicalities. I've never heard any sermon go even close to discussing the problems, let alone acknowledging the churches' own admission that the whole thing is incoherent.

 

[Katzpur]

Thanks. But those are metaphors ─ "to be of one mind" or "heart" or "soul" means simply to agree and to avoid fights and internal divisions.

And ─ as you say ─ it's not what the Trinity doctrine says, whereas it's the Trinity doctrine that I'm concerned with here.

Right, but the way in which they are "one" is that they are in full agreement and never at odds with one another. And John 17 teaches that Jesus wants His followers to be "one" in that same way. He wasn't suggesting that we all be absorbed into this essence which, for now, just includes Himself, His Father, and the Holy Ghost.

Under the Trinity doctrine, each of Father, Jesus and Ghost is a "person" made of "one substance". The claimed result is that each of Father, Son and Ghost is both a distinct person and IS God ─ not a fraction of God, not a representative of God, but the entirety of God. Since 100% + 100% + 100% = 300% = 3 gods, the result is incoherent, and this is admitted, by calling it "a mystery in the strict sense" (which means that "it cannot be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, and cannot be cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed" ─ their words, not mine).

But here I'm addressing a further internal contradiction, as set out in the OP: if each of Father, Jesus and Ghost has [his] own will, then this will be demonstrated by disagreement (since having your own will and always agreeing with Father is not having your own will). If there's only Father's will, then there's only one entity, which has three manifestations (the Trinity doctrine denies the persons are simply manifestations of God, each being the entirety of God). If indeed Jesus and the Ghost actually disagree with each other and with the Father ─ exercise an individual will ─ then there are three gods, not one.


By way of footnote, I doubt one Christian in a thousand has a clue about these technicalities. I've never heard any sermon go even close to discussing the problems, let alone acknowledging the churches' own admission that the whole thing is incoherent.

Well, as I said, I'm not a Trinitarian Christian, so I don't buy into that way of thinking myself. Furthermore, I do believe that my understanding of how God is a Godhead made of up three distinct personages who are in absolute unity of mind and purpose, makes a lot more sense than the Trinitarian way of seeing Him. At least it doesn't involve all of the contradictions the Trinitarian version does.

 

[truthseeker7]

Thanks for the clarification.

But the question in the OP is the issue I'm concerned with, and it arises from the specific form of the Christian Trinity doctrine:

If Jesus and the Ghost have only the same will as the Father, how can they be regarded as separate persons?

And if each has [his] own will, how can they not be regarded as three gods?

good point, the whole concept of it is in the stars

 

[Brian2]

The concept of the Egyptian soul is that there are three aspects to it. These Egyptian concepts helped me to understand the possibility of a Trinity better.

The Egyptian Soul: the ka, the ba, and the akh

I suspect the three in the Trinity Godhead having the same will is like three people working on a single project. They both have independent minds but have the same goal (will), which is to create the same thing. According to the Bible it is the Father that guides the other two though, which is why the Eastern Orthodox Trinity makes more sense to me in light of the Bible because both Jesus and the Holy Spirit emanate from the Father as he is the main source for them both.

The problem is that them being three persons but one being is a problem, as they have the same essence, but to me that seems the same as pagan Gods. Maybe their choice of words is wrong?

Another analogy, and one which comes from the Bible (not that any analogy is perfect) is to realise that humans are created in the image of God and we have 3 sides which each have their own will and roles and which usually work together as one (or should in an ideal situation).
Body, mind and spirit.
Without one of them, we are not complete.
Worth considering.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Another analogy, and one which comes from the Bible (not that any analogy is perfect) is to realise that humans are created in the image of God and we have 3 sides which each have their own will and roles and which usually work together as one (or should in an ideal situation).
Body, mind and spirit.
Without one of them, we are not complete.
Worth considering.

For me the best analogy I heard of, which only applies to the Eastern Orthodox Trinity is:

Sun, heat and light.

Both heat and light precede from the Sun the moment the sun comes into existence (I think).

 

[Brian2]

Thanks for that.

Unfortunately it doesn't address the question about the Christian Trinity doctrine that I was asking.

The Trinity doctrine, unlike the example you've given, says that the one God exists as one substance and three persons. However, according to the doctrine, and in defiance of sense, each of the three persons is God ─ not one third of God, not one of the three members of the board of God Corp, not one of the three God Partners, but each is 100% of God. Yes, 100% + 100% + 100% = 300% = 3 gods ─ but the doctrine denies that outcome. That's why its own theologians call it "a mystery in the strict sense", which means that "it can neither be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed" ─ a polite way of admitting it's incoherent.

Jesus is in His Father and His Father is in Him according to Jesus. The Holy Spirit is in the Son and the Father and is even called the Spirit of Christ and is called the Lord. (2Cor 3:17)
The 3 are in each other. If I looked at any one of them I would be seeing all 3. Each is 100% God in that way.
They each have the nature of God. The Son comes from the Father and so does the Holy Spirit,,,,,,,,,,,the Son has the same nature as His Father and the Holy Spirit is God's Spirit and was not created and so has the same nature. Each is 100% God in that way.
They do have different roles and for good reason. The Son is the real Son who comes from His Father and submits to Him in all things. The Spirit seems to be sort of like the body of God, the substance of God and so submits to God the mind of God which He knows.

The aspect that I'm trying to clarify in this thread is whether the three persons ever disagree with each other ie exercise an independent will. If they do, that would seem to confirm there were three gods, not one; and if they don't, if they have only the one will between them, that would seem to confirm that they were only one person as well as only one God.

Jesus certainly as a man on earth had 2 natures. Human and Divine. Coming to a torturous death His human nature screamed "no!" but He overcame that nature and did what His Father wanted, which was what He really also wanted with His Divine nature.
Now He has a new body and His Spirit fills all things. Eph 4:10
10He who descended is the very one who ascended above all the heavens, in order to fill all things.
There is complete harmony not between His body and Spirit and He chooses to do what His Father wills, which is what He also wants.

 

[blü 2]

Jesus is in His Father and His Father is in Him according to Jesus.

According to John's Jesus. I don't recall anyone else's making the claim. Paul's Jesus, like John's, and not like Mark's, and not like Matthew's or Luke's is the gnostic demiurge; that's why those two pre-exist in Heaven with God while the other three don't; and that's why each of those two made the material world while the other three didn't. An the reason the demiurge makes the material world is that God is entirely pure spirit so that making things from impure material wouldn't occur to [him]; thereafter the demiurge ─ the Jesus of John in particular, is the mediator between God and man, and why Joh
n's Jesus in John 17 explains how humans can be in Jesus and thus be in God in the same way Jesus is.

The Holy Spirit is in the Son and the Father and is even called the Spirit of Christ and is called the Lord. (2Cor 3:17)

That's not what the Trinity doctrine says, and each of the five versions of Jesus in the NT expressly denies he's God, simply God's envoy.

They each have the nature of God.

First of all the Trinity doctrine wasn't invented till the 4th century, and the reason for inventing it was to solve a political problem in the early church ─ how to promote Jesus to God status, but avoid the charge of being polytheistic like the pagans were. The result is incoherent and the churches acknowledge that this is the case. They use the expression 'mystery in the strict sense' and if you look it up you'll find that means 'it can neither be known by unaided reason apart from revelation, and cannot be cogently demonstrated once it has been revealed' ─ their words, not mine. If you think it through, you'll see it it means 'incoherent'.

The Son comes from the Father and so does the Holy Spirit

But according to all five Jesuses there is only one God and that's the Father and NOT Jesus.

That doesn't mean the Church can't have its (incoherent) Trinity Doctrine. It only means that the Trinity Doctrine is directly contradicted by the NT.

10He who descended is the very one who ascended above all the heavens, in order to fill all things.

Ahm, what am I supposed to be looking at on your link?

There is complete harmony not between His body and Spirit and He chooses to do what His Father wills, which is what He also wants.

If Jesus in heaven has his own will, and the Ghost has [his] own will, BUT they never exercise it, then there's only one will, and only one God, and that's the Father.

Without possession of their own independent wills independently exercised, their existence has no point It's ALL the Father.

 

[Muffled]

I find the expression "God's will" is used very commonly in Christian conversation.

So I ask ─

Does Jesus have a will independent of and distinguishable from the Father's will?

Does the Ghost?

If so, which of those does 'God's will' mean?

If not, in what sense are there 'three persons' instead of just, say, 'three manifestations'?

I believe Jesus has the will of God and the will of the physical body. So the Spirit of God in Jesus has an indistinguishable will from the Father's will.

The Paraclete has the will of God and the will of the person who has invited Jesus to be Lord and Savior.

There are three persons due to the fact that God is modified somewhat by the bodies He inhabits or doesn't inhabit not that God has changed but rather that the bodies modify what God can do.

 

[Muffled]

The trinity, which is never mentioned in any biblical script, from day one, has been the greatest source of religious friction among Christians. At the Council of Nicaea the feud continued which resulted in banishment of those who opposed the word Homoousian to properly define the divine trinity. The trinity is clearly derived from pagan sources. There is the Hindu trinity,Brahma,Vishnu and Siva. Mithraists also had a divine trinity.Originally, the trinity as a divine power was a part of ancient cosmology. regretfully,unknown christian writers read those ancient concepts literally and which resulted in confusion which has lasted for the last sixteen hundred years.

I believe the Bible has the Trinity in it so it is not fiction. Saying it is, is fantasy.

 

[Muffled]

Yes, the Trinity is the product of early (4th cent) church politics, and is called by the churches "a mystery in the strict sense", which is a polite synonym for "incoherent". However, there may be people ─ presumably Christians ─ who have a better insight into these questions than I do.

I believe you are incorrect. The Trinity is a product of God and church politics was intended to determine who had a correct view of it.

 

[blü 2]

I believe Jesus has the will of God and the will of the physical body. So the Spirit of God in Jesus has an indistinguishable will from the Father's will.

The Paraclete has the will of God and the will of the person who has invited Jesus to be Lord and Savior.

There are three persons due to the fact that God is modified somewhat by the bodies He inhabits or doesn't inhabit not that God has changed but rather that the bodies modify what God can do.

Do I correctly understand that you mean God is one entity who has three manifestations? If so, I agree that this makes sense, is a workable model of Threeness.

Unfortunately it's not what the Trinity Doctrine says. It says that each of the three persons is simultaneously that person and 100% of God.

And as I mentioned it also says that the Trinity Doctrine is incoherent, whereas the model you propose is coherent. As I said above, the churches hold that the Trinity is "a mystery in the strict sense". And when you look that up, you find it means "cannot be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed" (Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, but a parallel definition can be pieced together from the Catholic Encyclopedia under "trinity" and "mystery" and "mystery in the strict sense").

This puts the Trinity in the weird position of having no sensible explanation, with the corollary that any sensible explanation is wrong.

So my question in this thread is, Does each of the three persons have [his] own will? ─ in which case there are three gods. Or do the three persons have only one will, in which case your explanation works well.

But having a proclaimed incoherence at the center of the concept is a rock on which any explanation might founder.


(And I repeat that in the NT, each of the five versions of Jesus, those of Paul, Mark, Matthew, Luke and John, says he's NOT GOD, and never once claims to be God, I can set out the quotes again if you wish. That is, the Trinity Doctrine is contradicted by the NT.

However, that doesn't stop anyone accepting the Trinity Doctrine, incoherence and all ─ it simply prevents the claim that it's supported by the bible.)