|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 9:04 pm
I am in Seminary. I am taking a Master's Level class on the first five centuries of Christianity. One of the topics or issues dealt with is the Trinity. Their was and still is great debate over explaining the Trinity without taking anything away from God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. So, for fun, I want to hear other people's opinions on explaining the Trinity. Yes, I already know that trinity isn't in the Bible. I wanted to bring that up before anyone brings it up.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 9:42 pm
Well...I was going to try to explain it, and tried to type something out and deleted it maybe six times before I gave up.
Granted, I'm not exatly the best at articulating things, but the Trinity definitely is one of those things that's extremely difficiult to put into words.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 10:09 pm
SinfulGuillotine Well...I was going to try to explain it, and tried to type something out and deleted it maybe six times before I gave up. Granted, I'm not exatly the best at articulating things, but the Trinity definitely is one of those things that's extremely difficiult to put into words. I agree! Can we really ever explain the Trinity in any language and do it justice?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 9:58 am
do it justice? no... but I have one analogy I find helpful...
A judge went to work one day and sat on the podium as he always does. He asked for the first case to be brought in, someone wanted to sue someone else for a lot of money. When the defendant was brought in, however, the judge was shocked, He knew them both! One was a very good friend of his, known from childhood. The other was another acuaintance, one who was jelous of the time the judge would spend with his friend, and who wanted his friend destroyed.
How could he be impartial and uphold justice if he had to judge this case? The judge was in a tricky position, he knew he had to hear the case, and he had to come to the judgement that was just. The judge also knew that his friend could not afford pay the setlement without losing his buisness, his house, and his family.
So what did he do? He heard the case, and went to his room to think. It was a fair charge, under other circumstances he would have no problem ordering the defendant to pay.But this was his friend! What was he suposed to do now? Resigned, the judge walked out onto the podium and pronounced his judgement, the defendant had to pay, he was guilty. Prosecutor shouted with glee and his friend looked at him as if he had been betrayed.
Then the judge did something unprecedented. He took off his robe, stepped off the podium, and wrote a check for the exact amount owed. He then walked over to his friend, and offered it to him while the persecutors lauyers franticly looked through rulebooks to see if this was allowed, and the persecutor shouted obsenities.
God=judge Jesus=judge with robe off, offering the money. Holy Spirit=judge hanging out with his friend and having fun. Persecutor=Satan Defendant=Us
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 11:14 am
St. Patrick explained it best when said the Trinity was like a Shamrock  A Shamrock has 3 parts to One Leaf! biggrin
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 4:46 pm
dragonlove_48 do it justice? no... but I have one analogy I find helpful... God=judge Jesus=judge with robe off, offering the money. Holy Spirit=judge hanging out with his friend and having fun. Persecutor=Satan Defendant=Us That is a good example. It is though as I found out recently a very "Western" idea. The idea of law and penalty is from a focal emphasis on the cross. "Eastern" Christianity puts less emphasis on law and the cross. They would say that "life" the "incarnation" of Jesus is the most important. If it was not for the incarnation then what use would the cross have been. They are both correct. But it is interesting the viewpoints.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 5:38 pm
dragonlove_48 do it justice? no... but I have one analogy I find helpful... A judge went to work one day and sat on the podium as he always does. He asked for the first case to be brought in, someone wanted to sue someone else for a lot of money. When the defendant was brought in, however, the judge was shocked, He knew them both! One was a very good friend of his, known from childhood. The other was another acuaintance, one who was jelous of the time the judge would spend with his friend, and who wanted his friend destroyed. How could he be impartial and uphold justice if he had to judge this case? The judge was in a tricky position, he knew he had to hear the case, and he had to come to the judgement that was just. The judge also knew that his friend could not afford pay the setlement without losing his buisness, his house, and his family. So what did he do? He heard the case, and went to his room to think. It was a fair charge, under other circumstances he would have no problem ordering the defendant to pay.But this was his friend! What was he suposed to do now? Resigned, the judge walked out onto the podium and pronounced his judgement, the defendant had to pay, he was guilty. Prosecutor shouted with glee and his friend looked at him as if he had been betrayed. Then the judge did something unprecedented. He took off his robe, stepped off the podium, and wrote a check for the exact amount owed. He then walked over to his friend, and offered it to him while the persecutors lauyers franticly looked through rulebooks to see if this was allowed, and the persecutor shouted obsenities. God=judge Jesus=judge with robe off, offering the money. Holy Spirit=judge hanging out with his friend and having fun. Persecutor=Satan Defendant=Us I think you mean "prosecuter," not persecuter. Hitler was a persecuter of the Jews. The blonde chick in Law and Order is a prosecuter. It's okay. You're not the first person to make that mistake. And...I actually kinda like the analogy. I haven't heard that one before.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 6:22 pm
Hmm...since when is the Trinity not in the Bible? There are many verses that talk about them...I'd look some up right now but I'm lazy, but if anyone really wants me too...
As for an explanation, the one my Dad always told me was that it's like an apple! Three parts (skin, friut, cor/seeds), one apple. They're all different, they have different functions, but they're all the same apple.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 8:08 pm
x_Hikari_x Hmm...since when is the Trinity not in the Bible? There are many verses that talk about them...I'd look some up right now but I'm lazy, but if anyone really wants me too...
As for an explanation, the one my Dad always told me was that it's like an apple! Three parts (skin, friut, cor/seeds), one apple. They're all different, they have different functions, but they're all the same apple. What I mean is the word Trinity is nowhere in the Bible. The concept is though.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 8:09 pm
famusamu St. Patrick explained it best when said the Trinity was like a Shamrock  A Shamrock has 3 parts to One Leaf! biggrin I like that anology. I will have to share that with my seminary prof.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 9:56 pm
I think the best analogy I've heard is that of 3 flames. By themselves, they are flames. Together, they are still a flame. They never change, no matter where they are.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 11:12 pm
I honestly don't see whats so difficult here.
The Trinity = Father, Son, Holy Ghost
Father=Son=Ghost
They are one in the same, yet spiritually seperate into three different forms.
In simpliar terms the Son and Holy Ghost are two different forms of God. I had a debate not too long ago with John Calvin in here in the debate forum about this very thing. So I find it a bit ironic its being brought up again.
Isaiah 48: 16 "...And now the Lord God has sent Me, and His Spirit." According to my father, this is probably the ONLY verse in the entire bible that has setence involving the whole Trinity being mentioned at once. The significance of this? This is more or likely I guess in simple terms to show that there IS a Trinity, all of them being mentioned at once.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 10:26 am
SaintChaos I honestly don't see whats so difficult here. The Trinity = Father, Son, Holy Ghost Father=Son=Ghost They are one in the same, yet spiritually seperate into three different forms. In simpliar terms the Son and Holy Ghost are two different forms of God. I had a debate not too long ago with John Calvin in here in the debate forum about this very thing. So I find it a bit ironic its being brought up again. Isaiah 48: 16 "...And now the Lord God has sent Me, and His Spirit." According to my father, this is probably the ONLY verse in the entire bible that has setence involving the whole Trinity being mentioned at once. The significance of this? This is more or likely I guess in simple terms to show that there IS a Trinity, all of them being mentioned at once. This is not a debate. Maybe you didn't read completely my original post. Sfter studying in seminary about this topic, I wanted to see others viewpoints on this and have light discussion. We aren't debating Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit. It is more a discussion of explainging the Trinity without taking away from either entity. For instance, Jesus isn't just God's son as some would say. A better explanation would be Jesus is God, plus human, plus! There is more to it. That is what this thread is about. Seeing people's explanation of the trinity.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|