The Holy Trinity

edited December 1969 in Faith Issues
Hello,

I was trying to explain to a friend of mine the Holy Trinity. I used the example of the Sun etc.. but it didnt sink in for her. Could someone perhaps help with explaining this to someone who has no Christian background whatsoever?

Also, could you explain the differences between the Trinity as we have it in the Orthodox Church, and that of Jehovah's witness.

What is the relationship between each of the Hypostasis?

Cheers,

Comments

  • [quote author=vassilios link=board=1;threadid=4597;start=0#msg62834 date=1162818950]
    Also, could you explain the differences between the Trinity as we have it in the Orthodox Church, and that of Jehovah's witness.


    Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in the Holy Trinity, which they consider to be a blasphemous heresy.

    JW's are essentially modern day Arians.

    They believe that only the Father is God. The Son is just a creature (the Archangel Michael to be precise). The Holy Spirit is just seen as an impersonal force of God, not as a Person/Hypostasis - i.e. they see Him as an "it" not a "he".
  • Hi Orthodox11,

    Actually, i was asking about JW's because, during the mass, i was explaining to my friend that JW believe that Jesus Christ , being "a Son" came after the Father; but of course we believe that Christ was there since the beginning.

    But how would you explain the trinity to someone who is a not baptised? The relationship between the Father, the Son and Holy Spirit??

    Thanks

  • Vassilious,
    Hi. Try using the symbol of the Shamnrock !! which St. Patrick used to explain the Holy Trinity to the Irish!!!
    One leaf but 3 sections!!! but yet one. A very brief description !!!

    Geraldine















  • OK, but what's the relationship between all 3 persons of the Holy Trinity ?

    THis person is an architect.. she likes to have a bit more in-depth knowledge... im so cautious to explain to her as she's no potato.
  • It is as simple as GERALDINE's explanation!

    I am going to tell you of what I tell my kids in Sunday School Class.

    The Father, The Son, & The Holy Spirit is ONE!

    The Father is The Son is The Holy Spirit!

    In the Name of the Father, The Son, The Holy Spirit, ONE GOD AMEN!

    Another way to look at it, is when GOD "Jesus" was with sitting with his disciples and talking about how to go to Heaven , He said "Beilve in who send me, For I am HE"

    Also, when the High Priests were watching Jesus's every move they asked him who are you, and Jesus said somen like... "i am the father, and the son"

    Abona one time one time talking about how it is impossible and hard for a NON believer to see how GOD is the father and the son and the Holy Spirit.

    When Jesus was Baptised by John, while he was in the water, YOU CAN SEE THE SON (in the water), THE HOLY SPIRIT (the dove that stood on his shoulder), AND THE FATHER (who said "haza howa ebni alazi behi sorreart")

    It will take somebody with faith in god to understand THAT GOD IS THE FATHER IS THE SON IS THE HOLY SPIRIT.

    anybody can feel free to correct me, if i am wrong!

    bentBABAyasooa`
  • [quote author=bentBABAyasooa` link=board=1;threadid=4597;start=0#msg62851 date=1162832995]
    The Father is The Son is The Holy Spirit!


    You are right in saying that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are but One undivided God.

    However, it is not right to say that the Father is the Son is the Holy Spirit. This is the heresy of Sabellianism (modalism).
  • This is great. Please explain this Orthodox11 in your own words. I love Bentababa yasso3's way of explaining, and that's what we need. Just to keep it simple .

    I'd prefer the ideal orthodox explanation. But this girl will be baptised soon, and im recommending that she becomes catholic; not orthodox so its OK if the explanation isnt 100% coptic.

    Also, well done Bentbabayassoa'! Out of all the people here, only her and Orthodox 11 were the only ones to write something. I guess the rest didnt find anything worth judging or criticising me over in this topic.


  • y would u recommend her to catholic and not coptic ???
  • [quote author=vassilios link=board=1;threadid=4597;start=0#msg62853 date=1162834364]
    This is great. Please explain this Orthodox11 in your own words. I love Bentababa yasso3's way of explaining, and that's what we need. Just to keep it simple .


    When we say Trinity, we believe in a single God who exists eternally as three coeternal, coequal and consubstantial persons.

    The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. Yet they are not three gods, but One God only.

    However, although God is One; the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are nevertheless three distinct persons/hypostasies.

    So the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father - this is where Mira's explanation went wrong.

    Ice is not water (I'm thinking of it in liquid form here), nor is water steam, nor steam ice. But all three are H2O.

    Three in their respective properties (solid, liquid, gas), but one in their substance.


    I'd prefer the ideal orthodox explanation. But this girl will be baptised soon, and im recommending that she becomes catholic; not orthodox so its OK if the explanation isnt 100% coptic.

    I have to say this comment really worries me; but Its none of my business, so I won't go into detail on it.


    Also, well done Bentbabayassoa'! Out of all the people here, only her and Orthodox 11 were the only ones to write something.

    Don't forget Geraldine, who mentioned the shamrock thing, which is how St. Patrick explained the Trinity to the pagans.
  • [quote author=vassilios link=board=1;threadid=4597;start=0#msg62856 date=1162836290]
    What i told her so far was this; so please correct me if im wrong.

    God is love. Jesus Christ is the "act of love" - i.e. Love manifested. The Holy Spirit is the spirit of Love.

    Christ is the intellect or logos. All was created through Christ. God , the Father, created the world through the Son.

    Is that correct? Please correct me if im mistaken anywhere here...


    I can't find anything wrong with that, although it might be a bit vague (i.e. you might need to elaborate a bit); but nothing wrong as such.


    Just to add, don't take any analogies - whether it be water/ice/steam, sun/light/heat, etc. - in an absolute way. No earthly analogy can accurately convey the nature of God's existance.

    Such analogies normally fall into some form of modalism, where each Person of the Trinity is not sufficiently distinguished, or tri-theism, which separates Them completely.

    I just wanted to point that out before someone came along and said "ye, but your analogy fails because of................".

    They're not perfect, but can be useful when trying to teach others about it without being overly academic and complicated.
  • My dear Friends,

    Don't take any notice of me... I am learning all of this myself.. Being Irish St. Patrick and the Shamrock were all the explanation we got as to the Holy Trinity. One leaf - 3 parts - one ---
    Wasn't this the one thing we had to "accept" not question the reason or how it was!!!

    Interesting to get everyones take on this..

    God Bless and guide us all..


    Geraldine
  • i think the best analogy for God is a person in a family. someone can be a father, a husband, and a son at the same time but are one person.

    God Bless and Pray for me and my weakness
  • [quote author=vassilios link=board=1;threadid=4597;start=15#msg62881 date=1162898796]If they are 3 different persons; then are we saying that each person of the Holy Trinity has His own personality? The Holy Spirit's personality is distinct from the other 2 persons.


    I would be very careful in saying something like that. After all, the three Persons are but one single and undivided God.

    The will and operation of God is one. And so I don't think it would be right to say that the "personality" (in the common sense of the word) is distinct from that of the Father and the Son.


    Do we say that they share the same God-head, or each is consubstantial of the same divine nature?

    What's the difference between these two?

    I always understood Godhead and "divine nature" to be the same thing.


    Before Jesus Christ was born of Saint Mary, What was His relationship in the Holy Trinity. I mean, we say "The Father, the Son, and The Holy Spirit" ; but we say "Son" because He was born of the Holy Spirit and of Saint Mary.

    No, we do not. When He was born of the Virgin Mary, He became the Son of Mary with respect to His Incarnation.

    However, He was always the only-begotten of the Father, even before the Incarnation.

    As we say in the hymn "O Only begotten" (O monogenis), Christ became man "without change".

    His Incarnation changed His relationship with man, but not His relationship to the Father or Holy Spirit.

    Of course, we must not make the mistake of the Qur'an and think of the Sonship of Christ in a carnal sense (i.e. that He was born of the Father in the same way humans reproduce). This would be wrong.

    As St. Gregory of Nyssa explains when speaking of John 1:1:


    The evangelist fears our untrained state, and does not entrust to our ears the appellation of ‘Father’, lest any of the carnal minded imagine also by consequence a mother. Neither does He name in his proclamation the Son, lest any should humanize the Godhead by an idea of passion. For this reason He calls Him ‘the Word’ (o LogoV, the Logos), for as thy word (logos) proceeds from thy mind, without requiring the intervention of passion, so here also, in hearing of the Word, thou shalt not conceive that which is from something, and shalt not conceive passion.
    [ Against Eunomius, Bk. IV, § 1, in Nicene, 2nd Ser., V:154.]


    So, in the begining, Christ was the "word" (am i answering my own question here?). When we say "word" - that means "intellect" no? What is the meaning of logos theologically speaking ??? So, then it says "all things were made by Him". So, in what capacity did the Father create the world?

    Yes, Christ was the Logos of God, and still is the Logos of God.

    The "capacity" in which God created the world is hinted at in Psalm 32:6:
    "By the word of the Lord the heavens were established; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth."

    In both Greek and Hebrew, the word "breath" also means Spirit.

    So you have the Father creating through the Word and the Spirit.

    I is a summary of the opening chapter of Genesis (1-3), which says:
    "In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth. But the earth was unsightly and unfurnished, and darkness was over the deep, and the Spirit of God moved over the water. And God said , Let there be light, and there was light."

    So here, again, you see God creating through His Word and His Spirit.


    If God is Spirit, so how then is the Holy Spirit different than God the Father??

    I'll be entirely honest and say I don't know ;)


    Im not at all interested in knowing christology to the extent of the most intricate details; but i feel somehow, there's some nuances in basic concepts that we say in the Creed:

    "We believe in One God. The Father Almighty. Maker of Heaven and Earth. "

    So, here, we are saying that the Father is the creator of heaven and Earth.. of all things visible and invisible. So then, the Father is the creator.... not the Son??

    No, because if you go further on in the Creed, you read that "through Him [the Son] all things were created" and when you go even futher, the Holy Spirit is called "the giver of life."

    What the Creed is conveying, like the Scriptures, is that the Father creates through the Word and the Spirit.

    One cannot separate the actions of One Person from Another, since they are One God. Their substance, will, energy, activity, etc. is One.

    In XC,
    Kris
  • [quote author=vassilios link=board=1;threadid=4597;start=0#msg62834 date=1162818950]
    Hello,

    I was trying to explain to a friend of mine the Holy Trinity. I used the example of the Sun etc.. but it didnt sink in for her. Could someone perhaps help with explaining this to someone who has no Christian background whatsoever?

    Also, could you explain the differences between the Trinity as we have it in the Orthodox Church, and that of Jehovah's witness.

    What is the relationship between each of the Hypostasis?

    Cheers,
  • Orthodox11,
    have u read the attachment from Pope Kyro ?

    I don't think it says much, and doesnt respond to my questions.
  • So, when you say they are ONE God, why do we separate them as 3 different persons.

    When speaking of the Holy Trinity (or indeed of any ineffable Truth), we must be precise with our terminology. Human language is already limited enough as it is, and as long as it is the product of human reason then so it shall always be, so we should at least do our best to narrow the scope of such limitations.

    We do not separate the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity, we merely distinguish between them. Separation implies independency whereas distinction merely implies difference, so it is crucial that we be aware of this.

    There is no dichotomy between the Oneness of God and the Threeness of His Personhood, for God's "Oneness" and "Threeness" relate to different categories. God is One in being and hence nature, yet He is three in person/hypostasis. The term 'person' refers to a substantial principle of being, not an independent existence as we may understand the term to denote in our common everyday usage of it. When the term is applied to God it possesses a very distinct metaphysical connotation, God's One Existence/Being is defined by One Divine Essence/Nature which subsists in Three substantial realities each possessing rationale and will. These Three substantial realities are distinct centres of consciousness of the One and Same God. As such, these Three persons can Commune with the other.

    And also, when Christ said "I'll send you my Spirit, the Paraclete, why did He say that, if His Spirit was already there since the beginning and filled the universe from the beginning.

    He is referring to the sending of the Holy Spirit to effect the Redemption that the Lord Christ achieved, in the lives of all believers.

    Also, if the body of Jesus Christ is divine, then how can we touch divinity??? surely we cannot consume divinity??? We are not of the same essence of this nature to consume this?

    The Lord Christ's body is not divine. In fact such a teaching is a heresy condemned by the Church. As many of our Liturgical texts emphasise, Christ's humanity was true humanity. In the pre-Praxis hymn Apetjeek Evol, we confess Christ to be "perfect man"; in the Coptic Divine Liturgy of St. Gregory the Theologian the Priest tells us that Christ "resembled us in everything, except for sin alone". Christ's humanity was true, perfect and real humanity, just like the humanity of you and I. The only thing peculiar about His Humanity is that it was united with Divinity, since Christ, being God The Word, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, took this humanity as His very own, and united it to His very hypostasis. As such, His humanity, although true and real humanity, was nonetheless not mere humanity; it became life-giving humanity. When we partake of the Eucharist therefore, we do not partake of the divine essence, nor do we partake of mere human flesh; rather, we partake of the Life-Giving flesh that our Lord united with His very Divinity.
  • So, it would be correct then (Im just paraphrasing to make sure i get this 100%) , to say that we partake of the Holy Body, and not the "Divine Body of Christ" during the mass?

    Divinity and Humanity are two different categories of being, so Christ's Body being consubstantial with us (or in other words, of the very same and exact nature as our bodies), cannot be Divine.

    If you notice in the Priest's Last Confession (of any of the Three Divine Liturgies of the Coptic Orthodox Church) which he chants before he distributes the Eucharist, he Confesses that the Eucharist before Him is "the Life-Giving Body of [the] Only-Begotten Son"; so you could go with "Life-giving Body" so as to be more specific regarding its nature. "Holy Body" is perfectly fine though.

    Also, If Christ and the Father are "One", then why was He talking to the Father?

    The Father and Son are two distinct persons. As I said in my previous post, a person in theological terminology is simply a substantial reality or principle of being that subsists as a centre of consciousness. It does not refer to an individual/independent existence as it does when we use it in everyday language (for e.g. when we say, "look at that person"). Since the Father and Son are two distinct centres of consciousness possessing rationale and intellect, they cann communicate with eachother. Nevertheless, they are substantial realities and centres of consciousness of One existence (in contrast for example to you and I who are two centres of consciousness of two individual/independent existences), and hence they share One and the Same Divine essence (whereas you and I, although sharing a common essence i.e. the human essence, do not share One and the Same human essence).

    If you will note the context of John 10:30, you will find that the commonalities between the Father and Son which Christ used to establish as premises to His conclusion that He and the Father are one, concern the Power to Give Life and the Power to Preserve the Faithful. These attributes are shared in common between the Father and Son since both the Father and Son share the Same Divine Essence; this is the basis of His proclamation that He and the Father are One. He is not proclaiming to be the Person of the Father however. His prayer to the Father was no soliloquy; it was a prayer communicated from One Person (Son) to another distinc person (Father).
  • I mean, iqbal, He would be the Son of the Holy Spirit?? Non?? THat's my logical conclusion.

    Man, if i get these issues ironed out, im gonna run my own sunday school class , or give private lessons....

    I knew already what consubstantial meant, but i also know what God-head means... but it doesnt make 100% sense. God-head means somehow that there is some unity between them?? How so?? Its not as if each person in the Holy Trinity is separate.. they are all related?? I just can see the relationship between each person.

    Cheers
  • If they are 3 persons, why then do have the same God-head? What does that mean anyway "Godhead?"

    The Godhead of the Trinity simply pertains to the Divine Nature in which all Three Persons subsist.

    What is the role then of each person in the Trinity??

    It depends what you mean by "role".

    All Three Persons co-operate in perfect unity to effect God's purpose and plan: creation, revelation, redemption etc.

    Why do we say that Jesus Christ is the Son when He was only born of The Holy Spirit (the Third Person) and Saint Mary, and not of the Father??

    The Fathers speak of the double-birth of Christ. As we say in the Creed, He was first born/begotten of the Father before all ages, then in time He was born/begotten of the Holy Spirit and of the Virgin Mary.

    He is The Son of God by virtue of His being begotten of the Father, for this concerns the eternal birth of His very being and hypostasis. His being born of the Virgin pertains to His acquisition of Humanity from her at the Incarnation. Since His Humanity became very much an aspect of His being as His Divinity, we could speak of Christ being born of the Virgin insofar as She becoming the source of His Humanity. He was born of the Holy Spirit according to the Holy Spirit's effecting His conception in the Virgin's womb. He derives His being from neither the Virgin nor the Holy Spirit however, for He existed eternally before the Incarnation as The Son of God.
  • We believe in One God: which one ? There are 3 persons - how can they be one if you are saying they are 3 persons?!!

    Because I am not saying Three Persons are One Person, I am saying Three Persons subsist in One Nature and hence as One Being. Being, Nature, and Personhood are three different categories. God is conscious through three substantial principles of reality (i.e. Persons) that constitute His Being, hence we can rightfully identify all Three Persons as God.

    Bob is a father, Bob is a doctor, and Bob is a Basketballer--ultimately there is nonetheless one Bob. Now this analogy can obviously only be taken so far, since God is not one single Person siwtching between three personalities, but rather Three simultaneously subsisting eternal Persons; the analogy should at the very least just demonstrate the basic concept.

    And if they are ONE, why then did Jesus Christ speak to the Father? I mean, if He and His father are One, then why even speak to the Father ?

    As I said before, a Person is simply a substantial principle of reality that possesses faculties such as consciousness, intellect and will. As such, communication takes place between two persons i.e. "two minds", but one person cannot talk to himself. The Father and Son are not one Person, they are two Persons, hance their ability to commune and interact with eachother. Their Oneness regards the nature of their existence; since they both subsist in the One Divine Essence, they both possess the Divine Attributes and hence they are One in Essence and Power.


  • You will never be able to comprehend the Trinity, so if such is your aim then you are pursuing a futile cause.

    Can we comprehend the idea of Three Persons subsisting in One Essence and hence co-existing as One Being? No, and the reason why this is so is because there is nothing in all of creation that demonstrates such a concept so as to make it comprehensible to our human minds. But then again, if there were something in creation that reflects such a concept of being, then our God wouldn't be Unique would He? When David the Psalmist says that "there is none other like You" to God, He would be lying if there were a perfect demonstration of the Holy Trinity in creation. Some religions seek to bring God down to the level of creation and they gloat in holding faith in a simple concept of God--that is surely nothing to gloat about however; indeed, if God is no complex than His own creation, if He were One just like human beings are one, then we could hardly call Him God.

    Nevertheless, we have enough reason in our grasp to logically breakdown the so-called logical objections to it. We know, that logically speaking, to say that God cannot be One Being/Essence existing in Three Persons/Hypostases is to commit the logical fallacy known as the categorical fallacy. Surely 3X cannot = 1X, but 3X can surely = 1Y.

  • The point of my post was that the Trinity will never be comprehensible to anyone; not to you, nor to I. One may come to have a sufficient grasp of the metaphysics used to express the concept, but since no one will ever be able to relate the Trinity, Who is Unique and Transcendently Complex, to anything that mankind is familiar with in creation, then one will never comprehend the Sophistication of God's Triune Being.

    The most complex beings we humans have direct and familiar experience with is ourselves, and we are simple persons subsisting in our own individual existence, so we will never be able to relate God to ourselves in respect of Being. The God of the Jews and the Muslims may resemble such simple existences, but our God is transcendently superior to theirs.
  • [quote author=vassilios link=board=1;threadid=4597;start=30#msg63006 date=1163079973]
    Am i allowed to know why Jesus Christ said He'll send us His Holy Spirit if His Holy Spiriit was already there since the begining??


    The Holy Spirit was always there, but in a different sense.

    When Christ said He would send the Holy Spirit, He was talking about the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Apostles received Him in tongues of fire.

    We also receive the Holy Spirit in this way through our baptism and chrismation.
  • Hi,
    I spoke to my parents concerning this last night. Im very happy to say taht Iqbal's explanation is literally an echo of what they were saying. Its amazing how u all learnt this. But their way of explaining was a bit more comprehensible.

    I get it 100% now.

    Cheers
Sign In or Register to comment.