Login Register

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic Page 5 of 6   [ 119 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:44 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:54 pm
Posts: 4920
Location: Diocese of Austin, TX
Religion: Catholic
I would point out that there is a difference between a metaphor and the use of analogous language. When we say God is Three Persons, that is not a mere metaphor (whereas "God is a rock" is most certainly a metaphor).

_________________
Formerly Known as Louis-Marie Flambeau and RaginCajunJoe

"Be of good heart ... you who are children of Mary. Remember that she accepts as her children all those who choose to be so. Rejoice! Why do you fear to be lost, when such a a Mother defends and protects you?" - St. Alphonsus Liguori

"Blessed Virgin Mary - Immaculate Mother of God. Crushes Satan's head in her spare time." - CCB


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 12:30 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13609
Location: Inverted Cross domain
Analogy serves to explain a certain aspect(s) of a thing. It's an incomplete understanding (explaning the parts, not the whole). But it does help.

My robot analogy explain many aspects brilliantly.

1. It explains the oneness of the trinity (which is also what St. Patrick's clover's analogy does).

2. It explain how there are three different and distinct person much more clearly. Not, I've had many muslims say to me why Jesus prays to God, if He is God. Or, If Jesus is God, who is the voice saying "He is my beloved son." Or, if the Father sent Jesus, then there are two person.

What I said to these muslims is that this three persons are like three human persons. If Jack, Joe and James could communicate with one another, so does the three persons of the trinity could communicate with each other. The father could talk to the son, as Jack could talk to Joe and so forth. Now, "praying" is a form of communication. Thus, when Jesus was praying to God/Father, it's not a contradiction because they are two different persons (like Jack and Joe) and two person could talk to one another. The different is, while Jack and Joe have two substance/nature, the father and the son has (not "have", see what I did there?) One substance/nature.

3. It eloquently explains the nature of Jesus two natures. So, one of the person who controls the giant robot also controls a car. The two other persons only control the giant robot, but not the car. This in a nutshell is what hypostatic union is.


Awesome, ain't it?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:06 pm 
Offline
Adept
Adept
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 3:37 pm
Posts: 5955
Location: Bergen, Norway
Religion: High Church Lutheran
Church Affiliations: Church of Norway
beng wrote:
It explains the oneness of the trinity (which is also what St. Patrick's clover's analogy does).
No, neither your 'brilliant' explanation nor St. Patrick's clover's analogy 'explains' the oneness of the trinity.

beng wrote:
It explain how there are three different and distinct person much more clearly.
No, it ends up in a weird form of tritheism. The persons are only distinguished by their relations, but in your analogy they are separate entities. And that is why we just shouldn't use analogies to 'explain' the trinitarian relations. The 'explanations' always end up in either modalism or tritheism.

beng wrote:
What I said to these muslims is that this three persons are like three human persons.
And that's exactly NOT what they are. They are not three separated and independent individuals.

beng wrote:
If Jack, Joe and James could communicate with one another, so does the three persons of the trinity could communicate with each other.
Yes, but Jack, Joe and James are NOT united the way the divine persona are united.

beng wrote:
It eloquently explains the nature of Jesus two natures.
No, it treats nature as incidental and indepentent of the person, which is perfectly illustrated by your next sentence: "So, one of the person who controls the giant robot also controls a car."

beng wrote:
This in a nutshell is what hypostatic union is.
No, this is exactly NOT what the hypostatic union is.

beng wrote:
Awesome, ain't it?
No, not at all.

_________________
Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο

“Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt.” — Paul Tillich

http://katolikken.wordpress.com/
English texts: http://katolikken.wordpress.com/tag/english-texts-2/

http://www.facebook.com/kjetilkringlebotten

http://twitter.com/katolikken

http://thecatholic.wordpress.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 4:14 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13609
Location: Inverted Cross domain
Closet Catholic wrote:
beng wrote:
It explains the oneness of the trinity (which is also what St. Patrick's clover's analogy does).
No, neither your 'brilliant' explanation nor St. Patrick's clover's analogy 'explains' the oneness of the trinity.


Completely, no. Analogously, yes.

Quote:
beng wrote:
It explain how there are three different and distinct person much more clearly.
No, it ends up in a weird form of tritheism. The persons are only distinguished by their relations, but in your analogy they are separate entities. And that is why we just shouldn't use analogies to 'explain' the trinitarian relations. The 'explanations' always end up in either modalism or tritheism.


The three persons controling the root are siamese triplets. So there.

Quote:
beng wrote:
What I said to these muslims is that this three persons are like three human persons.
And that's exactly NOT what they are. They are not three separated and independent individuals.


Siamese triplets. Solved.

Quote:
beng wrote:
If Jack, Joe and James could communicate with one another, so does the three persons of the trinity could communicate with each other.
Yes, but Jack, Joe and James are NOT united the way the divine persona are united.


Well, duh!

Quote:
beng wrote:
It eloquently explains the nature of Jesus two natures.
No, it treats nature as incidental and indepentent of the person, which is perfectly illustrated by your next sentence: "So, one of the person who controls the giant robot also controls a car."


The car's control is in the robot. So there.

Quote:
beng wrote:
This in a nutshell is what hypostatic union is.
No, this is exactly NOT what the hypostatic union is.


In English, "nutshell" is not interchangeable to "exactly."

Quote:
beng wrote:
Awesome, ain't it?
No, not at all.

Give me yours and I'd butcher it like there's no tomorrow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 5:03 pm 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 77227
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
Actually you have a quaternity. Three divine persons and a distinct divine substance they all share.

_________________
Nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nostri

Need something to read?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 5:07 pm 
Offline
Adept
Adept
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:25 am
Posts: 4262
Location: Fort Smith, AR
Religion: Christian & Missionary Alliance
Which necessarily is a composite being and therefore contingent and thus not even Divine. If beng were to literally insist his analogy is of God, he's actually left with atheism. Perhaps he has a superpowerful and unusual comic book "God", but definitely not God in any meaningful sense.

_________________
Making Divine Simplicity Simple: Rediscovering Who and What God Is - an evangelical's (my!) attempt to explain Divine Simplicity in non-technical language
The Galatian Heresy (Gal 3:1-6) - An Argument for Sanctification by Faith Alone


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 5:43 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13609
Location: Inverted Cross domain
The rule of the game is: before criticizing beng's analogy, come up with yours and let it be criticized mercilessly by beng."

Ok, let's play!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 5:46 pm 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 77227
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
The rule of the game is: don't bite off more than you can chew.

_________________
Nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nostri

Need something to read?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:15 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13609
Location: Inverted Cross domain
I'm not violating that rule.

Let see if you follow the first one I stated.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:28 pm 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 77227
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
You are.

_________________
Nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nostri

Need something to read?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 10:45 pm 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 77227
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
In terms of your proposed analogy, the robots do not drive the car. Each robot is the car. There is no part of the car that is not part of each and every robot, and there is no part of any robot that is not part of the car. That ends up as a rotten analogy because it's like nothing in our experience, which is the problem with analogies about the Trinity in general.

Each of the Divine Persons possesses the one Divine Essence whole and entire.
*De fide.* Nicene-Constantinoplean Creed (D150); Council of Rome, A.D. 382 (D152 ff.); *Firmiter* (D800); Lateran IV, *De Trinitate* (D804).

It is the divine Persons who proceed, not the Divine Nature.
*De fide*. Lateran IV, *De Trinitate* (D804).

The Three Divine Persons are in one another.
*De fide.* Council of Florence, *Cantate Domino* (D 1331).

_________________
Nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nostri

Need something to read?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 1:39 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13609
Location: Inverted Cross domain
Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote:
In terms of your proposed analogy, the robots do not drive the car. Each robot is the car. There is no part of the car that is not part of each and every robot, and there is no part of any robot that is not part of the car. That ends up as a rotten analogy because it's like nothing in our experience, which is the problem with analogies about the Trinity in general.

Each of the Divine Persons possesses the one Divine Essence whole and entire.
*De fide.* Nicene-Constantinoplean Creed (D150); Council of Rome, A.D. 382 (D152 ff.); *Firmiter* (D800); Lateran IV, *De Trinitate* (D804).


We've been through this, right? That the substance is the person and the person is the substance where you quoted that summa? Where I said "nason" or "perture?"

So, I am aware of it.

But like Saint Patrick, who must've know that a shamrock (finally I google it) is a poor analogy for trinity, I use it anyway.

Unless you got a better analogy.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 7:03 am 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 77227
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
1) St. Patrick very likely didn't use the shamrock analogy. It's not attributed to him until centuries after his death.

2) A bad analogy is worse than no analogy at all. The robot analogy doesn't give any insight at all into the doctrine of the Trinity. To the extent that someone would think they understood the Trinity better because of it, they would have a false idea of the Trinity.

_________________
Nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nostri

Need something to read?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 5:35 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13609
Location: Inverted Cross domain
1. I could come up with different saint who use analogy (say, Augustine's "sun, light, warmth").

2. A good analogy is better than no analogy. Compare to the others, mine is superior. But if you have a better one....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 6:08 pm 
Offline
Adept
Adept
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 3:37 pm
Posts: 5955
Location: Bergen, Norway
Religion: High Church Lutheran
Church Affiliations: Church of Norway
beng wrote:
A good analogy is better than no analogy.
Yes, but your analogy is not good. As Jack points out, it literally entails atheism. The 'God' of your analogy is as 'divine' as Thor.

_________________
Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο

“Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt.” — Paul Tillich

http://katolikken.wordpress.com/
English texts: http://katolikken.wordpress.com/tag/english-texts-2/

http://www.facebook.com/kjetilkringlebotten

http://twitter.com/katolikken

http://thecatholic.wordpress.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 6:10 pm 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 77227
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
There is literally nothing in beng's metaphor that will help anyone get a better understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity, and much that can lead to grave misunderstandings.

_________________
Nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nostri

Need something to read?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:23 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13609
Location: Inverted Cross domain
The rule is, ya'll need to come up with a better analogy before criticizing beng's.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:23 am 
Offline
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:55 am
Posts: 77227
Location: 1.5532386636 radians
Religion: Catholic
Church Affiliations: 4th Degree KofC
Why? There is no commandment, "Thou shalt have an analogy."

_________________
Nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nostri

Need something to read?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:49 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 3:37 pm
Posts: 5955
Location: Bergen, Norway
Religion: High Church Lutheran
Church Affiliations: Church of Norway
beng wrote:
The rule is, ya'll need to come up with a better analogy before criticizing beng's.
No, I have no desire to espouse heresy.

_________________
Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο

“Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt.” — Paul Tillich

http://katolikken.wordpress.com/
English texts: http://katolikken.wordpress.com/tag/english-texts-2/

http://www.facebook.com/kjetilkringlebotten

http://twitter.com/katolikken

http://thecatholic.wordpress.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trinity question
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 10:14 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:10 pm
Posts: 13609
Location: Inverted Cross domain
Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote:
Why? There is no commandment, "Thou shalt have an analogy."


There's also no, "thou shalt not make analogy of trinity."

So, I'm making one. A good one. Anyone says its bad, let them come up with a better one or hold their peace.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 5 of 6   [ 119 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


Jump to: