Freethought & Rationalism Archive

rlogan · 05-18-2004, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

I do not consider it to be any "new" form of god, or any "new" doctrine,
but based on the evidence of Scripture, it has been my conviction for years that The Elohim of the Scriptures was always, and yet is, to be understood as a Quadra-Unity.

In concept, the four equilateral and square sides join to form a pefect cube, having six perfect and equal planes, existing in four dimensions, in which all that may be measured or quantified, is measured and quantified, from that the least, to that the greatest, even all things that exist, And in Whom we also live, and move, and have our being.

trinity plus one

timecube, baby...

Answerer · 05-19-2004, 03:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

hello Anwerer.

You need to be looking towards the Council of Constantinople in 381 C.E.

Athanasius was a key player prior to that. He attended the first council in 325 but died before the second.

I guess that's the "finishing off" of the trinity idea.

You can see in the early writings that the Church fathers struggled with certain aspects of Christ being "God" - a "beam" of the sun, sort of. The Logos idea.

I think tertullian used the word "Trinity", but not in the same sense as ultimately adopted. "All in one" but not all is God.

Eusebius and the Arians fought the whole "jesus is god" thing for years. Even after 381 it wasn't universal.

So you have quite a long development before it became dogma enough to kill anyone over.

Ok, I get what you said, but how will you explain the (Pre 325 AD) remarks as the followings:

Quote:

Ignatius of Antioch (died 98/117). Bishop of Antioch. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.
"In Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father with the Holy Spirit for ever" (n. 7; PG 5.988).

"We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For ‘the Word was made flesh.' Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts." (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 1, p. 52, Ephesians 7.)

Irenaeus (115-190). As a boy he listened to Polycarp, the disciple of John. He became Bishop of Lyons.
"The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: ...one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father ‘to gather all things in one,' and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, ‘every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess; to him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all...'" (Against Heresies X.l)

Tertullian (160-215). African apologist and theologian. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.
"We define that there are two, the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit, and this number is made by the pattern of salvation...[which] brings about unity in trinity, interrelating the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance but in form, not in power but in kind. They are of one substance and power, because there is one God from whom these degrees, forms and kinds devolve in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit." (Adv. Prax. 23; PL 2.156-7).

Origen (185-254). Alexandrian theologian. A disciple of Origen. Defended Christianity. He wrote much about Christianity.
"If anyone would say that the Word of God or the Wisdom of God had a beginning, let him beware lest he direct his impiety rather against the unbegotten Father, since he denies that he was always Father, and that he has always begotten the Word, and that he always had wisdom in all previous times or ages or whatever can be imagined in priority...There can be no more ancient title of almighty God than that of Father, and it is through the Son that he is Father" (De Princ. 1.2.; PG 11.132).

"For if [the Holy Spirit were not eternally as He is, and had received knowledge at some time and then became the Holy Spirit] this were the case, the Holy Spirit would never be reckoned in the unity of the Trinity, i.e., along with the unchangeable Father and His Son, unless He had always been the Holy Spirit." (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 4, p. 253, de Principiis, 1.111.4)

"Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification..." (Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, p. 255, de Principii., I. iii. 7).

Mistranslated or misquoted?

GakuseiDon · 05-19-2004, 06:08 AM

From the good ol' Catholic Encyclopaedia: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm

Quote:

The word trias (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom ("Ad. Autol.", II, 15). The term may, of course, have been in use before his time. Afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian ("De pud." c. xxi). In the next century the word is in general use. It is found in many passages of Origen ("In Ps. xvii", 15). The first creed in which it appears is that of Origen's pupil, Gregory Thaumaturgus. In his Ekthesis tes pisteos composed between 260 and 270, he writes:

There is therefore nothing created, nothing subject to another in the Trinity: nor is there anything that has been added as though it once had not existed, but had entered afterwards: therefore the Father has never been without the Son, nor the Son without the Spirit: and this same Trinity is immutable and unalterable forever (P. G., X, 986).

Clivedurdle · 05-19-2004, 06:59 AM

Jung argued - I think cogently - that the catholic church in the nineteenth century dumped the Trinity and made God a quaternity with the promotion of Mary, the Mother of God!

Sheshbazzar · 05-19-2004, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

trinity plus one

timecube, baby...

I would rather refrain from a reply to this, yet I must protest, lest some innocents should leap to the erronous conclusion that I share, or agree with the ideology of that link, or other such sites.
Geometry, and time exist, and mathematics are the standards by which all peoples in all times and in all languages may come to identical conclusions.
Do you know of a time, or of a location, or of a culture, where the form of, or the geometry of, or mathematics of square and cube are other, or are variable from these known standards?
A geometrical figure with a length of twenty units, and a width of ten units,
presents a perimeter of sixty units,- is this an offense to you?
If a fool points out to you that fifteen weeks have one hundred five days,
and seven divisions of three hundred sixty hours, or three hundred sixty divisions of seven hours, two divisions of twelve hundred sixty hours, or twelve hundred sixty divisions of two hours,- is this an offense to you?
If a fool points out to you that twenty fathoms is one thousand four hundred forty inches, and that fifteen fathoms is one thousand eighty inches, and the sum of the two, is two thousand five hundred twenty inches, and that the difference is three hundred sixty,- is this an offense to you?
If a fool points out that much has been neglected and forgotten and twisted and perverted, will you not agree? Respectfully, Sheshbazzar

abe smith · 05-19-2004, 08:21 AM

The OP here is a very-damn-good QUESTION, you who asked it!
I'll go with it to the current (multi-volume) *Catholic Encyclopedia* which you can consult if it's available to you. (at your local major-public, or university library.) I'll try to get back about this soon; you could consult on-line, surely. Try google , search um, "Christian dogma of Trinity, history of" or something tight like that.

(later) "
'Kay. link here:
www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm

This appears to be the complete text of the Catholic Encyclopedia article, *The Blessed Trinity*., which I infer shd be the best-accessible and tersest answer for your OP qy, Guy. Go & see.

rlogan · 05-19-2004, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Answerer

Ok, I get what you said, but how will you explain the (Pre 325 AD) remarks as the followings...

Mistranslated or misquoted?

I don't understand why you think this is contrary evidence. It is exactly as I said. The church fathers struggled with the idea for a very long time.

The "end" of that struggle was an official church policy and labelling of other opinions as heretical.

Nobody would have been "banished" from the church in circa 180 for not accepting the official version of "trinity" that culminated in 381.

hey Sheshbazzar-

I thought you were bringing us to the holy time cube. Sorry for the confusion.

NOGO · 05-19-2004, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GakuseiDon
Theophilus of Antioch about A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom ("Ad. Autol.", II, 15).

In my opinion the original Christian idea was quite sound as Theophilus and GJohn explain it.

In the begining the "Word" was with God.
When God spoke the Word came out. It was not created but simply became evident.

... And God said "Let there be light"
GJohn, Paul and Theophilus tell us that God created the world through Jesus, ie through the Word.

When you talk about Jesus being a man then
and only then the trinity no longer makes sense.

Answerer · 05-20-2004, 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

I don't understand why you think this is contrary evidence. It is exactly as I said. The church fathers struggled with the idea for a very long time.

I get what you had told me, the implementation of Trinity as a dogma but what about the origin of this idea? From Paul?

Amaleq13 · 05-20-2004, 06:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Answerer

I get what you had told me, the implementation of Trinity as a dogma but what about the origin of this idea? From Paul?

Paul seems to me to consider Jesus a.k.a. the Son a.k.a. Christ to be a completely separate entity from God but he does treat this figure as at least somewhat divine.

In the sense that Paul's "somewhat" likely caused later Christians difficulties, I suppose you could consider the Trinity to be an attempt to resolve those difficulties.

05-19-2004, 06:59 AM	#14
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Quadra-Unity Jung argued - I think cogently - that the catholic church in the nineteenth century dumped the Trinity and made God a quaternity with the promotion of Mary, the Mother of God!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-19-2004, 08:21 AM	#16
abe smith Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: springfield, MA. USA Posts: 2,482	The OP here is a very-damn-good QUESTION, you who asked it! I'll go with it to the current (multi-volume) Catholic Encyclopedia which you can consult if it's available to you. (at your local major-public, or university library.) I'll try to get back about this soon; you could consult on-line, surely. Try google , search um, "Christian dogma of Trinity, history of" or something tight like that. (later) " 'Kay. link here: www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm This appears to be the complete text of the Catholic Encyclopedia article, The Blessed Trinity., which I infer shd be the best-accessible and tersest answer for your OP qy, Guy. Go & see.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.