What is the Trinity?

by pirata 42 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • pirata
    pirata

    From this thread: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/204837/2/If-you-could-ask-one-question-to-an-active-JW-to-get-them-to-open-their-mind-about-their-beliefs-what-would-it-be

    dontplaceliterature Re: If you could ask one question to an active JW to get them to open their mind about their beliefs, what would it be? posted ~ 14 hours ago (1/18/2011)



    Post 63 of 65
    Since 12/28/2010

    @Ding,

    Please elaborate here, or via a PM to me about The Trinity and what the 'world's' acutally explanation is, if Jehovah's Witnesses have it wrong. I've always been taught that the Trinity was different depending on the person you asked. No one has ever explained it to me the same way as the previous person, and frankly, their explinations were silly, at best (It's like and Egg...apple...or some such illustration). I'll never forget asking my Sister-In-Law (a Methodist) to explain it to me, and she just sounded rediculous. Her boyfriend at the time was Bahai (sp?). He also found her explination silly. But, they do not believe in a Trinity either, nor do Muslims (largest religion in the world (if JWs are excluded from Christianity), nor the Jews. I would like to hear a good, common sense explination.

    The Bible is pretty simple when it comes down to it. This should be something easy to understand if it is a fundamental teaching of God.

    pirataRe: If you could ask one question to an active JW to get them to open their mind about their beliefs, what would it be? posted ~ 14 hours ago (1/18/2011)




    Post 962 of 963
    Since 12/31/2009

    I don't believe in the Trinity, but there is a thorough discussion of the brochure "should you believe in the Trinity" by Christians who believe in the Trinity:

    http://4witness.org/jwysbt/ysbt_contents.php

    It's a long read, but addresses the context of all quotations made in the brochure.

    dontplaceliterature Re: If you could ask one question to an active JW to get them to open their mind about their beliefs, what would it be? posted ~ 3 hours ago (1/18/2011)



    Post 65 of 65
    Since 12/28/2010

    I don't believe in the Trinity, but there is a thorough discussion of the brochure "should you believe in the Trinity" by Christians who believe in the Trinity:

    http://4witness.org/jwysbt/ysbt_contents.php

    It's a long read, but addresses the context of all quotations made in the brochure.

    @Pirata, the very first paragraph contradicts the Bible when it says that Jesus was not created. Colossians specifically calls him "The Firstborn of all Creation."

  • pirata
    pirata
    @Pirata, the very first paragraph contradicts the Bible when it says that Jesus was not created. Colossians specifically calls him "The Firstborn of all Creation."

    Like I said, I don't believe in the Trinity. I think it is a by-product of of trying to unify the concept of God in the Hebrew scriptures with the importance that Jesus had to the 1st C. Christians and the role of the Holy Spirit. That being said, to argue for or against it, it's good to have a concept of what contemporary Christians believe it is.

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    Ah the Trinity.

    It is a doctrien of Nature, not identity.

    God is God because that is what God is.

    Jesus is begotten of God, as such he is, by nature, what God is and what is God? that's right, God.

    The HS is the spirit of God and of Jesus, so what does that make it? well, if the HS is the spirit of God then it must be what? God.

    It really isn't that complicated.

    What the TRinity does NOT say is that Jesus is Our Father, which is what JW's keep telling you it says.

    And by the way, I am NOT a trinitarian but I have no issues with the Trinity doctrine for what it is:

    Man's attempt to understand the nature of God, Jesus and the HS and the relationship they have to one another.

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    What is the Trinity?

    I'm Catholic. We believe in the Trinity.

    As we pray:

    Glory be to the Father and to

    the Son and to the Holy Spirit,

    as it was in the beginning, is now

    and ever shall be, world without

    end.

    Amen.

    And as we confess to believe.

    That we worship one God in trinity and the trinity in unity, neither blending their persons nor dividing their essence. For the person of the Father is a distinct person, the person of the Son is another, and that of the Holy Spirit still another. But the divinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is one, their glory equal, their majesty coeternal.

    What quality the Father has, the Son has, and the Holy Spirit has. The Father is uncreated, the Son is uncreated, the Holy Spirit is uncreated.

    The Father is immeasurable, the Son is immeasurable, the Holy Spirit is immeasurable.

    The Father is eternal, the Son is eternal, the Holy Spirit is eternal.

    And yet there are not three eternal beings; there is but one eternal being. So too there are not three uncreated or immeasurable beings; there is but one uncreated and immeasurable being.

    Similarly, the Father is almighty, the Son is almighty, the Holy Spirit is almighty. Yet there are not three almighty beings; there is but one almighty being.

    Thus the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God. Yet there are not three gods; there is but one God.

    Thus the Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, the Holy Spirit is Lord. Yet there are not three lords; there is but one Lord.

    Just as Christian truth compels us to confess each person individually as both God and Lord, so catholic religion forbids us to say that there are three gods or lords.

    The Father was neither made nor created nor begotten from anyone. The Son was neither made nor created; he was begotten from the Father alone. The Holy Spirit was neither made nor created nor begotten; he proceeds from the Father and the Son.

    Accordingly there is one Father, not three fathers; there is one Son, not three sons; there is one Holy Spirit, not three holy spirits.

    Nothing in this trinity is before or after, nothing is greater or smaller; in their entirety the three persons are coeternal and coequal with each other.

    So in everything, as was said earlier, we must worship their trinity in their unity and their unity in their trinity.

    http://www.aboutcatholics.com/faith_beliefs/athanasian_creed/

    BTS

  • Ding
    Ding

    DontPlaceLiterature,

    My definition of the Trinity would be as follows: "Within the nature of the one true God there are three distinct Persons -- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit."

    All analogies to God break down at some point because God is unique, but the best comparison I have heard is the triple point of a substance.

    For example, 0.01 degrees Celsius is the triple point of H2O, at which that substance exists simultaneously as solid, liquid, and gas. Each is fully H2O, yet solid, liquid, and gas are distinct states. Yes, I realize these substances aren't persons. I'm just making an analogy to something in nature.

    You said that the Bible is pretty simple, and in some ways it is.

    But in other ways it isn't.

    For example, the Bible says God has no beginning.

    That can be stated in 4 words, but I personally have a lot of difficulty comprehending that.

    I hope I've responded adequately to your question.

    I haven't tried to prove the Trinity doctrine from the Bible here because (a) you didn't ask me to and (b) various aspects of this have been discussed on other threads and in various links. If you'd like me to go into it here, I will.

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    All analogies to God break down at some point because God is unique, but the best comparison I have heard is the triple point of a substance.

    That is a good one. I also like C.S. Lewis' explanation in his book Mere Christianity:

    The last chapter was about the difference between begetting and making. A man begets a child, but he only makes a statue. God begets Christ but He only makes men. But by saying that, I have illustrated only one point about God, namely, that what God the Father begets is God, something of the same kind as Himself. In that way it is like a human father begetting a human son. But not quite like it. So I must try to explain a little more.

    A good many people nowadays say, "I believe in a God, but not in a personal God." They feel that the mysterious something which is behind all other things must be more than a person. Now the Christians quite agree. But the Christians are the only people who offer any idea of what a being that is beyond personality could be like. All the other people, though they say that God is beyond personality, really think of Him as something impersonal: that is, as something less than personal. If you are looking for something super-personal, something more than a person, then it is not a question of choosing between the Christian idea and the other ideas. The Christian idea is the only one on the market.

    Again, some people think that after this life, or perhaps after several lives, human souls will be "absorbed" into God. But when they try to explain what they mean, they seem to be thinking of our being absorbed into God as one material thing is absorbed into another. They say it is like a drop of water slipping into the sea. But of course that is the end of the drop. If that is what happens to us, then being absorbed is the same as ceasing to exist. It is only the Christians who have any idea of how human souls can be taken into the life of God and yet remain themselves-in fact, be very much more themselves than they were before.

    I warned you that Theology is practical. The whole purpose for which we exist is to be thus taken into the life of God. Wrong ideas about what that life is, will make it harder. And now, for a few minutes, I must ask you to follow rather carefully.

    You know that in space you can move in three ways-to left or right, backwards or forwards, up or down. Every direction is either one of these three or a compromise between them. They are called the three Dimensions. Now notice this. If you are using only one dimension, you could draw only a straight line. If you are using two, you could draw a figure: say, a square. And a square is made up of four straight lines. Now a step further. If you have three dimensions, you can then build what we call a solid body, say, a cube-a thing like a dice or a lump of sugar. And a cube is made up of six squares.

    Do you see the point? A world of one dimension would be a straight line. In a two-dimensional world, you still get straight lines, but many lines make one figure. In a three-dimensional world, you still get figures but many figures make one solid body. In other words, as you advance to more real and more complicated levels, you do not leave behind you the things you found on the simpler levels: you still have them, but combined in new ways-in ways you could not imagine if you knew only the simpler levels.

    Now the Christian account of God involves just the same principle. The human level is a simple and rather empty level. On the human level one person is one being, and any two persons are two separate beings-just as, in two dimensions (say on a flat sheet of paper) one square is one figure, and any two squares are two separate figures. On the Divine level you still find personalities; but up there you find them combined in new ways which we, who do not live on that level, cannot imagine. In God's dimension, so to speak, you find a being who is three Persons while remaining one Being, just as a cube is six squares while remaining one cube. Of course we cannot fully conceive a Being like that: just as, if we were so made that we perceived only two dimensions in space we could never properly imagine a cube. But we can get a sort of faint notion of it. And when we do, we are then, for the first time in our lives, getting some positive idea, however faint, of something super-personal-something more than a person. It is something we could never have guessed, and yet, once we have been told, one almost feels one ought to have been able to guess it because it fits in so well with all the things we know already.

    You may ask, "If we cannot imagine a three-personal Being, what is the good of talking about Him?" Well, there isn't any good talking about Him. The thing that matters is being actually drawn into that three-personal life, and that may begin any time -tonight, if you like.

    What I mean is this. An ordinary simple Christian kneels down to say his prayers. He is trying to get into touch with God. But if he is a Christian he knows that what is prompting him to pray is also God: God, so to speak, inside him. But he also knows that all his real knowledge of God comes through Christ, the Man who was God-that Christ is standing beside him, helping him to pray, praying for him. You see what is happening. God is the thing to which he is praying-the goal he is trying to reach. God is also the thing inside him which is pushing him on-the motive power. God is also the road or bridge along which he is being pushed to that goal. So that the whole threefold life of the three-personal Being is actually going on in that ordinary little bedroom where an ordinary man is saying his prayers. The man is being caught up into the higher kind of life-what I called Zoe or spiritual life: he is being pulled into God, by God, while still remaining himself.

    http://www.truthaccordingtoscripture.com/documents/apologetics/mere-christianity/Book4/cs-lewis-mere-christianity-book4.php#b

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    I think that Mere Christianity should be a must read for anyone that is thinking to discuss and understand Christianity.

  • Ding
    Ding

    As far as "firstborn over all creation" is concerned, several points.

    In the Bible, "firstborn" often does not mean "first one created" (there's a separate Hebrew word for that); it means "pre-eminent."

    Example:

    -- In Genesis 41:51-52, Joseph's firstborn son (chronologically) was Manasseh; his second son was Ephraim. Yet in Jeremiah 31:9, God says that Ephraim is his firstborn. Why? Because Ephraim was pre-eminent.

    -- Esau (Edom) was Isaac's first born son; Jacob (Israel) was born second (Genesis 25:25-26); yet in Exodus 4:22, God tells Pharaoh that Israel is his firstborn. Why? Because by God's choice Israel was the pre-eminent son.

    -- In 1 Chronicles 5:2, Joseph has the rights of the firstborn; he was Jacob's pre-eminent son even though he was his 11th son in birth order.

    So why is Jesus called the firstborn over all creation? Because he was the first thing created? No. Because he is pre-eminent over all creation:

    Colossians 1:16-17: "For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together."

    Note that if Jesus created all things, he isn't one of the things created.

    Note also that all things were created FOR him, that he is BEFORE all things, and all things hold together IN HIM.

    This is not a description of a mere creature.

  • AuntBee
    AuntBee

    Our Readers Ask: Does God Have a Beginning?

    "As difficult as the concept of God's eternity is to grasp, we cannot dismiss the idea simply because we cannot fully comprehend it. How reasonable is it that we should expect to understand all of God's ways.. There are aspects of Jehovah God and his workings that are too deep for our minds to fathom."

    WT, July 1, 2010

    In this instance, the idea of "mystery" and aspects of God being incomprehensible are ok, while at the same time Christendom is mocked for believing in the Trinity, because it's beyond our reasoning/comprehension.

  • TTWSYF
    TTWSYF

    All analogies to God break down at some point because God is unique, but the best comparison I have heard is the triple point of a substance.

    Good point Ding. I liked your analogie.

    Another way that the Trinity could be comprehended could be like comparing God to time. You need a past/present/future for time. You can't really have time without any one of them. All three are concepts of time, all three are separate and equal are they not? Maybe?

    The 'Should you believe in the Trinity?' should be removed from circulation as it initially made me look away from my Catholic faith [for years]. I had no quams about this when I thought that the booklet was well researched and it certainly looked it.

    Once I researched the facts I got to see how quite despicable and disingenuous the Watchtower was [and still is] in promoting this 'lying for the Truth' propaganda.

    sorry if that sounds harsh, but there is no example of an almighty Trinity, eternal and uncreated in any other religous belief. It is not 'borrowed' from any Egyption, Hindu, pagan or Greek myth. All of the church fathers listed in the booklet [sybitt?] believed in Jesus Christ as 'God in the flesh' or 'God with Us'. All listed have complete writtings available.

    respectfully,

    DC

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit