The trinity doctrine.

Author: Mall
trinity
faith
holy

Posts

Total: 200
#181
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,905
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@MAV99
Suppositum Definition: Something supposed to be true; an assumption. Suppositum Latin From the past participle of supponere, to suppose.
No. That is not what it means.
Sub ponere. To be placed under.
It developed into the latin word supponere which has the primary meaning of "to place under"
Which transfered to the philosophical meaning of that which is placed under the appearances of something or substance. In other words: what the thing is. Which is determined by nature. So yes,
He was talking about nature. St. Thomas assumes you have already read his philosophical works and can tell when he is talking about certain concepts in A treatise about God. Which further points to the fact that you haven't studied this, because you don't understand what is being said.
There is nothing about the trinity that is determined by nature or even considered natural.

Thomas Aquinas' Trinitarian theology has been criticized as proposing an abstract notion of God that is divorced from salvation history and that is supported by tedious and ultimately incomprehensible explication.

Trinity definition provided by the Catholic Church:
The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the “consubstantial Trinity”. The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: “The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God.” In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), “Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature.”
The divine persons are really distinct from one another. “God is one but not solitary.” “Father”, “Son”, “Holy Spirit” are not simply names designating modalities of the divine being, for they are really distinct from one another: “He is not the Father who is the Son, nor is the Son he who is the Father, nor is the Holy Spirit he who is the Father or the Son.” They are distinct from one another in their relations of origin: “It is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds.” The divine Unity is Triune.
You did not complete the sentence God the father is the son and is the Holy Spirit. God the father means god is the father.
"God the Father" is the combination of words referring to the First person of the Trinity.
Tyson the boxer means Tyson is a boxer. God the father means God is the father.
"God is the Father" means we are applying a nature to a person.
THEY DO NOT MEAN THE SAME THING.
What is the nature of someone mean?
Someone's nature is their character, which they show by the way they behave. Just how do the managers harness their energy, rivalry and ambitious nature into winning teamwork? She trusted people. That was her nature. Synonyms: temperament, character, personality, disposition More Synonyms of nature.

God the Father is a title given to God in Christianity. In mainstream trinitarian Christianity, God the Father is regarded as the first Person of the Trinity. It is a title given to God.
This tells me you haven't studied the basic philosophy and logic or theology behind this.
You cannot even grasp the concept of the Trinity.

I never said I could. Nor did I say anything that says I have.
Here you admit you cannot even grasp the concept of the Trinity.
The first says there is no real distinction in Persons.”
This is referring to what YOU said.
That is a lie. You said it is your post#155
The first says there is no real distinction in Persons.
The second says All 3 Persons have the same nature.

#182
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,905
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@MAV99
God the father is the son and is the Holy Spirit...
 does not say the same thing as:

God is Father, God is Son, and God is Holy Spirit...
What did Jesus say about the Trinity?
He did not specifically refer to the term Trinity but did describe God in what we would call trinitarian terms or formulations. Jesus described God as "the Father", he described himself as God's son, and one with God the Father, and described the Holy Spirit as somehow proceeding from both the Father and himself.

Note even Jesus calls God the Father.
#183
MAV99
MAV99's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 308
2
2
6
MAV99's avatar
MAV99
2
2
6
-->
@Shila
There is nothing about the trinity that is determined by nature or even considered natural.
He is using the word "natural" analogically. You would have known that if you understood what he was talking about.

Thomas Aquinas' Trinitarian theology has been criticized as proposing an abstract notion of God that is divorced from salvation history and that is supported by tedious and ultimately incomprehensible explication.
Says who? You? The Council of Trent did not seem to think so.

What is the nature of someone mean?
Someone's nature is their character, which they show by the way they behave. Just how do the managers harness their energy, rivalry and ambitious nature into winning teamwork? She trusted people. That was her nature. Synonyms: temperament, character, personality, disposition More Synonyms of nature.
That is not what it means in philosophy or theology.  Further showing you don't know what you are talking about.

God the Father is a title given to God in Christianity. In mainstream trinitarian Christianity, God the Father is regarded as the first Person of the Trinity. It is a title given to God.
"God" is a term that is universally applied to the Three persons. However, when you apply it to one you are saying that person has the nature of God. Saying: "God the Father" is a particular and then to say "is a title applied to God" You are using the term "God" here universally. To then go from there to say that "God the Father is God the Son" is to say two particulars are the same thing because of a universal nature. That is a fallacy.

The first says there is no real distinction in Persons.
This is what I said and the "the first" refers to your post #143:

Therefore God the father is the son and is the Holy Spirit, and that these are not three but one God.
So I was referencing you as I said.
Note even Jesus calls God the Father
Yeah, when he was referring to the First Person of the Trinity. I am not saying The First Person is not God. I am saying the Second Person is not God the Father because that is what the church teaches.
#184
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,905
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@MAV99
There is nothing about the trinity that is determined by nature or even considered natural.
He is using the word "natural" analogically. You would have known that if you understood what he was talking about.
St Thomas Aquinas repeatedly used the word same/sameness when comparing the three.

Aquinas says that the alleged consequence would follow only if the persons were the same both in thing and in concept. But they are not; they are merely the same thing.
This move is puzzling. Aquinas holds that the three are not merely similar or derived from the same source, but are in some strong sense the same, but not identical (i.e. numerically the same) which he appears to understand as sameness in both thing and concept. Even this last is surprising; one would think that for Aquinas “sameness in thing” just is identity, and that “sameness in concept” would mean that we apply the same concept to some apparent things (whether or not they are in fact one or many). Christopher Hughes holds that Aquinas is simply confused, his desire for orthodoxy having led him into this (and other) necessary falsehoods. On Hughes’s reading, Aquinas does think of “sameness in thing” as identity, but he incoherently holds it to be non-transitive (i.e. if A and B are identical, and B and C are identical, it doesn’t follow that A and C are identical), while in some contexts assuming (correctly) that it is transitive (Hughes 1989, 217–40).
Thomas Aquinas' Trinitarian theology has been criticized as proposing an abstract notion of God that is divorced from salvation history and that is supported by tedious and ultimately incomprehensible explication.
Says who? You? The Council of Trent did not seem to think so.
They did not know how to handle the contradictions the Trinity doctrine caused.

"God is the Father" means we are applying a nature to a person.
What is the nature of someone mean?
Someone's nature is their character, which they show by the way they behave. Just how do the managers harness their energy, rivalry and ambitious nature into winning teamwork? She trusted people. That was her nature. Synonyms: temperament, character, personality, disposition More Synonyms of nature.
That is not what it means in philosophy or theology.  Further showing you don't know what you are talking about.
God the Father is a title given to God in Christianity. In mainstream trinitarian Christianity, God the Father is regarded as the first Person of the Trinity. It is a title given to God.
"God" is a term that is universally applied to the Three persons. However, when you apply it to one you are saying that person has the nature of God. Saying: "God the Father" is a particular and then to say "is a title applied to God" You are using the term "God" here universally. To then go from there to say that "God the Father is God the Son" is to say two particulars are the same thing because of a universal nature. That is a fallacy.
God the Father is a title given to God in Christianity. In mainstream trinitarian Christianity, God the Father is regarded as the first Person of the Trinity, followed by the second person, Jesus Christ the Son, and the third person, God the Holy Spirit.
The first says there is no real distinction in Persons.
This is what I said and the "the first" refers to your post #143
Therefore God the father is the son and is the Holy Spirit, and that these are not three but one God.
So I was referencing you as I said.
Note even Jesus calls God the Father
Yeah, when he was referring to the First Person of the Trinity. I am not saying The First Person is not God. I am saying the Second Person is not God the Father because that is what the church teaches.
Therefore God the father is the son and is the Holy Spirit, and that these are not three but one God.

The Trinity (Latin: Trinitas, lit. 'triad', from Latin: trinus 'threefold') is the Christian doctrine concerning the nature of God, which defines one God existing in three, coeternal, consubstantial divine persons: God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ) and God the Holy Spirit, three distinct persons (hypostases) sharing one essence/substance/nature (homoousion).

What did Jesus say about the Trinity?
He did not specifically refer to the term Trinity but did describe God in what we would call trinitarian terms or formulations. Jesus described God as "the Father", he described himself as God's son, and one with God the Father, and described the Holy Spirit as somehow proceeding from both the Father and himself.

Note even Jesus calls God the Father.

#185
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,707
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Shila
 and one with God the Father

Which simply means in agreement/ on the same side..


Note even Jesus calls God the Father.
Indeed . Clearly indicating both to be separate beings. And also note that Jesus often refers to himself clearly as the "son of man".  

If this not be the case, why do we have verses such as " My god why have you forsaken me"?  "Jesus prayed to his father"?  "Father take this burden from me"?

Surely we are not to believe that Jesus was  pleading with himself?  Prayed to himself ? And asked himself to be unburden, himself?
#186
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,905
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
and one with God the Father

Which simply means in agreement/ on the same side..


Note even Jesus calls God the Father.
Indeed . Clearly indicating both to be separate beings. And also note that Jesus often refers to himself clearly as the "son of man".  

If this not be the case, why do we have verses such as " My god why have you forsaken me"?  "Jesus prayed to his father"?  "Father take this burden from me"?

Surely we are not to believe that Jesus was  pleading with himself?  Prayed to himself ? And asked himself to be unburden, himself?
Jesus went a step further.

John 10:30-38
I and the Father are one.”
31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

John 14:9
Don't you know who I am? If you have seen me, you have seen the Father. How can you ask me to show you the Father? 

The final catch.
John 1:In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

What did Jesus say about the Trinity?
He did not specifically refer to the term Trinity but did describe God in what we would call trinitarian terms or formulations. Jesus described God as "the Father", he described himself as God's son, and one with God the Father, and described the Holy Spirit as somehow proceeding from both the Father and himself.

#187
DavidAZZ
DavidAZZ's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 394
2
2
5
DavidAZZ's avatar
DavidAZZ
2
2
5
-->
@Mall
@WyIted
I'm late to the race, but I wanted to throw in my two cents on this topic:

-The baptism of Jesus and what John the Baptist saw-

John the Baptist was obviously the forerunner for Christ.  He was told from God that he would be shown in a vision who the Christ was.  The vision was only for John and the heavens were only opened for him (John).  It was not an actual reference of God or of a Trinity.  It was a vision to prove to John that Jesus was the Messiah.  John referred to this when he spoke to his disciples.

The reason Trinitarians use this is that it shows a count of three in the vision.
#188
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,905
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@DavidAZZ
The reason Trinitarians use this is that it shows a count of three in the vision.
True the verses mention three in John’s vision. The word Trinity does NOT exist in the Bible. However, it is a word which was coined by Theophilus of Antioch writing in the late 2nd century. However, it was more commonly accepted in the early 3rd century by the early church father Tertullian.

Mark 1:9–11
The Baptism of Jesus
In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized byJohn in the Jordan. 10 And when he came up out of the water, immediately hetsaw uthe heavens being torn open vand the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And a voice came from heaven,  “You are my beloved Son;1 with you I am well pleased.”

Luke 3:21–22
21 Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heavens were opened, 22 and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son;with you I am well pleased.”

John 1:32–34
32 And John bore witness: “I saw the Spirit descend from heaven like a dove,and it remained on him. 33 I myself did not know him, but fhe who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 And I have seen andhave borne witness that this is the Son1 of God.”





Topic's author
#189
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 400
Posts: 2,092
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@DavidAZZ
I heard trinitarians use the baptism to illustrate 1 John 5 and 7.

But they'll say, the Father stayed in heaven while the holy Ghost descended, that's error.
Topic's author
#190
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 400
Posts: 2,092
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@DavidAZZ
I will debating live on this subject tomorrow. 1pm U.S. Eastern time over discord. For more information, send me a message.
#191
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,905
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Mall

I heard trinitarians use the baptism to illustrate 1 John 5 and 7.

But they'll say, the Father stayed in heaven while the holy Ghost descended, that's error.

Jesus is considered the first person to receive the baptism with the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit descended on Jesus during his baptism (Luke 3:21–22). After his baptism, Jesus goes into the wilderness and is tempted; however, he "returned in the power of the Spirit" (Luke 4:14).
Topic's author
#192
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 400
Posts: 2,092
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@Shila
It's error to say that the scripture teach the Father stayed in heaven. People are contradicting what Jesus even said .
#193
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,905
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Mall
It's error to say that the scripture teach the Father stayed in heaven. People are contradicting what Jesus even said .

Did Jesus say God sent him?
The book of John also makes this abundantly clear: "No one has ascended to heaven but He [Christ] who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man" (John 3:13). Jesus further said, "For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me" (John 6:38).

God sent Jesus to atone for human beings sins. God has sent Jesus to save our lives because God loves us. John 3:16 KJV - For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

#194
MAV99
MAV99's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 308
2
2
6
MAV99's avatar
MAV99
2
2
6
-->
@Shila
St Thomas Aquinas repeatedly used the word same/sameness when comparing the three.
No. He did not. Because he was speaking philosophically.

The quote you gave is from Hughes. I dont know how else to say this but. St. Thomas Aquinas is not Hughes. Make sense?

God the Father is a title given to God in Christian...
No. God the Father is a title given to the first Person who shares the nature of God with two other Persons. That is not to say the same thing as they are all each other because they are all God. That is sabellionism.

Therefore God the father is the son and is the Holy Spirit, and that these are not three but one God.
How does this conclude from what I said??????? 

You are digging yourself deeper by trying to impose what YOU think the correct answer is. Not a very good catholic spirit.
#195
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,905
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@MAV99
St Thomas Aquinas repeatedly used the word same/sameness when comparing the three.
No. He did not. Because he was speaking philosophically.

The quote you gave is from Hughes. I dont know how else to say this but. St. Thomas Aquinas is not Hughes. Make sense?
Hughes is a historian studying St Thomas Aquinas. He quotes St Thomas and what he finds troubling about his sameness document.
This move is puzzling. Aquinas holds that the three are not merely similar or derived from the same source, but are in some strong sense the same, but not identical (i.e. numerically the same) which he appears to understand as sameness in both thing and concept. Even this last is surprising; one would think that for Aquinas “sameness in thing” just is identity, and that “sameness in concept” would mean that we apply the same concept to some apparent things (whether or not they are in fact one or many). Christopher Hughes holds that Aquinas is simply confused, his desire for orthodoxy having led him into this (and other) necessary falsehoods. On Hughes’s reading, Aquinas does think of “sameness in thing” as identity, but he incoherently holds it to be non-transitive (i.e. if A and B are identical, and B and C are identical, it doesn’t follow that A and C are identical), while in some contexts assuming (correctly) that it is transitive (Hughes 1989, 217–40).

God the Father is a title given to God in Christian...
No. God the Father is a title given to the first Person who shares the nature of God with two other Persons. That is not to say the same thing as they are all each other because they are all God. That is sabellionism.
The first person is God the father. 
They don’t share the same nature. God is also the second person Jesus and also the third person the Holy Spirit in the Trinity.
Therefore God the father is the son and is the Holy Spirit, and that these are not three but one God.
How does this conclude from what I said???????

You are digging yourself deeper by trying to impose what YOU think the correct answer is. Not a very good catholic spirit.
You are wrong about Hughes . Hughes was quoting St Thomas Aquinas.
Topic's author
#196
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 400
Posts: 2,092
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@Shila
Sure .
#197
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,905
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Mall
Sure .
Now you are sure you are wrong. You are wrong about Hughes . Hughes was quoting St Thomas Aquinas.
#198
MAV99
MAV99's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 308
2
2
6
MAV99's avatar
MAV99
2
2
6
-->
@Shila
what is Hughes' reference? The quote you gave is Hughes explaining St. Thomas in his own words. What is the reference from St. Thomas he is using?
#199
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,905
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@MAV99
what is Hughes' reference? The quote you gave is Hughes explaining St. Thomas in his own words. What is the reference from St. Thomas he is using?

The article was taken from the History of Trinitarian Doctrines published by Stanford.edu. The  document discusses the history of Trinity theories. St Thomas Aquinas being one of them. Hughes interpretation was included.
The interpretation of Aquinas on these points is difficult. Other recent philosophers, more sympathetic to Aquinas’ trinitarian theory, have not tried to salvage the entire theory, but have, with the help of various distinctions not explicitly made by Aquinas, sought to salvage his basic approach. This involves developing and trying to vindicate his apparently mode-based approach to the persons (which seem to be God’s relating to himself in three ways), showing how these relations may in fact be substantial persons, or specifying a relation which the persons may each bear to the divine essence which is something short of (classical, absolute) identity but much like it.
#200
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,905
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@MAV99
what is Hughes' reference? The quote you gave is Hughes explaining St. Thomas in his own words. What is the reference from St. Thomas he is using?

You cannot even grasp the concept of the Trinity. From your post#177

I never said I could. Nor did I say anything that says I have.