Heresy about Trinity?

Heresy about Trinity? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> God

Message

ReelVerse.com -> Heresy about Trinity? (1/4/2008 11:19:34 AM)
I want to make a video about the trinity and want to use a person as metaphor. I want to say that we have our flesh that wrestles against our soul. However, when we give our life to Christ we are born of the Spirit. So now we have our flesh, our soul and the spirit all trying to take control over our focus. Is this heresy?

JimboFletch -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/4/2008 11:38:03 AM)
I wouldn't call it heresy at all. But like every metaphor I've ever heard or ever tried to use in explaining the Trinity, it has a weakness that fails to explain it completely. In order to do it well, any aspect of three must be able to stand alone as a whole. I've heard an egg used: the shell, the white, the yolk. But the shell by itself isn't an egg. The yolk by itself isn't an egg. Same with the white. In your metaphor, the flesh alone doesn't make a complete person (though humanists might disagree). Same with sould & spirit. They are different aspects of what constitute a person, but alone, none of the three can be said to be a person. Nothing in this world quite captures the essence of the Trinity. God the Father is fully God. God the Son is fully God. God the Holy Spirit is fully God. But God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is also fully God.

TJO5 -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/4/2008 12:08:44 PM)
Hello JimboFletch, quote: Nothing in this world quite captures the essence of the Trinity. I was thinking that clouds might work. clouds There are different sorts of cloud, because of how fast the air goes up and if the air stands still or is moving. Also, some clouds make more rain, or make thunder and lightning. These differences come from how big the water droplets are, and how they join together. There are three basic types of clouds: Stratus clouds Cumulus clouds Cirrus clouds Here you have a trio of things ,all called the same , each easily differentiated from the other two,different appearance and function. Yet they are all clouds -sharing the same substance. What do you think? Yours in Christ, T.J.

ta_mosquito -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/4/2008 1:17:09 PM)
Moving this from The Bible to God.

figmentPez -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/4/2008 3:58:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ReelVerse.com I want to make a video about the trinity and want to use a person as metaphor. I want to say that we have our flesh that wrestles against our soul. However, when we give our life to Christ we are born of the Spirit. So now we have our flesh, our soul and the spirit all trying to take control over our focus. Is this heresy? Yes, it is heresy, because God is not a single person. Humans are not triune. Even if man is tripartite (body, soul and spirit) and not bipartite (body and spirit/soul), man is not triune because a man is not three persons. A man's body is not the son of his soul, as the Son really is the son of the Father. If you want to teach about the triune nature of God, why not start with scripture instead of man-made metaphors?

figmentPez -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/4/2008 4:08:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JimboFletch I've heard an egg used: the shell, the white, the yolk. But the shell by itself isn't an egg. The yolk by itself isn't an egg. Same with the white. More than that. If someone had never seen an egg before, and looked at just the shell, they would have no idea what the white or the yolk was like. However, by knowing the Son of God, we know the Father and the Holy Spirit as well. The Son is the very image of His Father, but the same cannot be said of the parts of an egg. quote: I was thinking that clouds might work. clouds There are different sorts of cloud, because of how fast the air goes up and if the air stands still or is moving. Also, some clouds make more rain, or make thunder and lightning. These differences come from how big the water droplets are, and how they join together. There are three basic types of clouds: Stratus clouds Cumulus clouds Cirrus clouds Here you have a trio of things ,all called the same , each easily differentiated from the other two,different appearance and function. Yet they are all clouds -sharing the same substance. What do you think? Well, I've got to say that it's a better analogy than most I've heard. It has a similar flaw to the three phases of water analogy in that the substance of the clouds changes forms. Water changes from ice to liquid to vapor with the temperature, and the water droplets in clouds change their form with the weather. However, the persons of the trinity are eternally who they are. The Father is always the Father, at no point did the Father become the Son or anything like that. However, since most people don't see clouds change forms, as most people have seen water, that issue is less pressing. However, I still have to ask why so many Christians start their teaching of God's nature with man-made analogies, instead of starting with scripture? Oh, and Here are some threads already going about trinitarian doctrine: Oneness Believers in Theology -> God Trinity in Theology -> God Question about Jesus in Theology -> Christian Doctrine What is the Trinity in Theology -> God Explaining the Trinity! in Theology -> Christian Doctrine Why so much apathy about trinitarian doctrine? in Faith -> FaithWalk Is Jesus the SON only or is he the Father and the Holy Spirit too? in Theology -> God The Trinity made...SIMPLE in Theology -> God Let's get a discussion going on Oneness Pentecostalism in Theology -> God Help: What is the problem people have with The Trinity? in Theology -> God Acknowledgment of the Trinity in Theology -> The Bible Trinity? in Theology -> Christian Doctrine I have a question in Theology -> Christian Doctrine Christianity makes no sense... in Theology -> Christian Doctrine Explaining the Trinity to a 5 year old in Theology -> God The Godhead in Theology -> God Is it a requirement for salvation that I,... in Faith -> General Faith God and Jesus the same person in Theology -> God THE TRINITY GOD in Faith -> General Faith Is Jesus God in Theology -> God Looking for scriptural proof in Theology -> God three distinct persons in Theology -> Christian Doctrine and (a quote of myself from another thread) "Here is an incomplete listing of verses that show God's nature, and that are important to understanding that nature is triune: Daniel 7:13-14; Revelation 1:17-18, 4:1-11, 5:1-14, 17:14, 19:7-19; John 1:1-5 & 14-18, 3:13-17, 6:41-69, 8:12-30, 14:11-20, 17:5; Exodus 3:14-16; Hebrews 1:5-10, 9:14; Nehemiah 9:6; Matthew 28:8-10; Romans 8:34; Luke 23:46; Mark 16:19; Colossians 1:13-20; Phillipians 2:5-11; 1Corinthians 8:6; Isaiah 44:6, 48:12; Deuteronomy 6:4... and many many more. If you'd like explanation on how any of these applies to the subject at hand, I'd be happy to oblige."

TJO5 -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/4/2008 4:48:34 PM)
Hello figmentPez, quote: Well, I've got to say that it's a better analogy than most I've heard. It has a similar flaw to the three phases of water analogy in that the substance of the clouds changes forms. Water changes from ice to liquid to vapor with the temperature, and the water droplets in clouds change their form with the weather. However, the persons of the trinity are eternally who they are. The Father is always the Father, at no point did the Father become the Son or anything like that. However, since most people don't see clouds change forms, as most people have seen water, that issue is less pressing. However, I still have to ask why so many Christians start their teaching of God's nature with man-made analogies, instead of starting with scripture? I think most people do start with scripture. But when explaining how the Father, the Son,and the Holy Spirit are all God when there is only one God to people who cannot understand the concept,they usually look for an example people can understand. Human nature I suppose. And there really isn't an example that works perfectly. Like you point out-even the clouds changing forms violates what we know. No member of the trinity changes form to appear as another. Only in the general sense,and in a moment frozen in time,are the clouds even remotely satisfactory. Yours in Christ, T.J.

cajunhillbilly -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/6/2008 7:50:00 AM)
As finite humans we do need analogies to understand the infinite Triune God, as long as we understand the analogies can NEVER fully explain God's nature. We think of God in analogies all the time. Who really understands eternity? We are temporal beings and cannot understand God's eternity. So we use analogies to try to understand it and finally say it is incomprehensible to a finite temporable being. The same with the Trinity. We are unipersonal beings. We really cannot understand a Tripersonal Being. But we can attempt to do so with analogies. But just stick to Scripture and say it is incomprehensible. The problem with Unitarians of any kind, is that they want God to be totally comprehensible.

Christs Apprentice -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/6/2008 12:53:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ReelVerse.com I want to make a video about the trinity and want to use a person as metaphor. I want to say that we have our flesh that wrestles against our soul. However, when we give our life to Christ we are born of the Spirit. So now we have our flesh, our soul and the spirit all trying to take control over our focus. Is this heresy? I admire you for wanting to make a movie about the Trinity, but to be honest I don't think that's a good metaphor; the Father, Son and Holy Ghost work together (1 Jn. 5:7), they aren't wrestling for control, so I don't think you could accurately portray the Trinity by using a human with a flesh, spirit and soul that wrestle against each other. That aside, when we come into the kingdom we put to death the works of the flesh and come alive in Spirit. The verses in Romans about flesh vs. spirit are speaking of unsaved vs. saved- the unsaved are controlled by the flesh, but the saved are led by the Spirit. It's not sayint that, after we're saved, there is a constant battle against our flesh and our Spirit raging within us. "For when we were in the flesh (past tense, prior to salvation), the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. But now (present tense, after salvation) we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held (in the motions of sins while in the flesh); that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter." Romans 7:5-6, parenthesis added. Anyway, I hope you don't mind my input. I hope all goes well with your movie.

figmentPez -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/6/2008 3:39:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Christs Apprentice I admire you for wanting to make a movie about the Trinity, but to be honest I don't think that's a good metaphor; the Father, Son and Holy Ghost work together (1 Jn. 5:7), they aren't wrestling for control, so I don't think you could accurately portray the Trinity by using a human with a flesh, spirit and soul that wrestle against each other. Thank you for mentioning that. It is a very important point that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are in perfect unity, that very word giving rise to the word trinity (tri - unity).

heavenwardalways -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/7/2008 10:33:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ReelVerse.com I want to make a video about the trinity and want to use a person as metaphor. I want to say that we have our flesh that wrestles against our soul. However, when we give our life to Christ we are born of the Spirit. So now we have our flesh, our soul and the spirit all trying to take control over our focus. Is this heresy? That's awesome you want to make a vid about the trinity. that might help people understand the Trinity. The manner in how you want to write it leaves it less desired though. It probably will end up confusing people. I understand what you are saying but to put it in that format wont work. The Trinity is -The Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit. Not flesh, soul, and spirit. This will be a difficult project you take on. The Trinity is 3 but yet 1. Good luck.[:D]

Dred -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/9/2008 1:09:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Christs Apprentice I admire you for wanting to make a movie about the Trinity, but to be honest I don't think that's a good metaphor; the Father, Son and Holy Ghost work together (1 Jn. 5:7), they aren't wrestling for control, so I don't think you could accurately portray the Trinity by using a human with a flesh, spirit and soul that wrestle against each other. Of course, it should at least be emphasized that this is not part of the metaphor, but the disunity of a human is not how a human is meant to be--we all have a disorder that makes this so. I assumed the disunity is used only to demonstrate that there are 3 entities, by virtue of the fact that those entities can have their individual desires which conflict. I would not call it heresy unless you state this as an exact representation. However, according to Merriam-Webster Online, a metaphor is "a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness or analogy between them." I don't think that claiming a likeness of some degree is going too far. Heresy is not thinking and imagining analogies and realizing we don't fully understand. Rather, heresy often comes from trying to fully explain to our own comprehension what we either can't understand or don't yet understand. It often comes from refusing to admit we don't understand something about God or what He has done and, instead, substituting for God and His work something simple which we can understand. However, I think the only real purpose of such examples (I won't even say analogies or metaphors) is to knock back the common complaint that 3 in 1 is illogical and, thus, an impossibility. Since that is the only practical purpose, why not call them only examples of 3 in 1 and no more than that? The presentation of such things as good models always seems to go too far and ways can be found in which the correspondence of the analogy breaks down. But to help some understand the generic concept of 3 in 1, which some foolishly claim impossible, examples may be good. The example of body/soul/spirit becomes more abstract than other examples, but has the advantage of dealing with something alive as opposed to inanimate objects. At least a disembodied spirit would usually be viewed as a person, if the body is not. Even the animated body is some kind of entity since it has, in the language Paul used, "desire" which may conflict with those of the spirit or mind. For a fictional example involving entities, I suggest Mr. Spock and his Vulcan mind meld. Temporarily, two people become one communal being. All of these may help establish that the concept of 3 in 1 is not really beyond comprehension in itself. If the Trinity itself is still beyond our comprehension, that is to be expected--God is infinite. I would suggest that be talked about as well. I think that may be the real comprehension problem rather than the concept of 3 in 1, which we run into without thinking about it. I think this is also a very good reason that all the finite models people use (I have heard of no infinite models) break down at some point. I've never met anyone who can really get a complete picture of infinity in the mind. Not even mathematicians claim this, though we work with the infinite frequently. So infinity itself is hard to imagine, but thinking of the existence of infinity may make other concepts easier to understand. In fact, if there were two beings who were in all ways infinite, it seems they'd have to be more of a unity than Mr. Spock and his very close friend. They would instantly know one another's thoughts at all times, as in the mind meld, but additionally would always agree because of infinite wisdom. Again, before I get yelled at, even my last example is not a representation of the Trinity, but only an example establishing the logical possibility of 3 also being 1. I assume that you would quote the Bible heavily to establish the Trinity and how we must view it directly.

figmentPez -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/9/2008 1:45:13 PM)
Dred, the Vulcan mind meld isn't real. A fictional concept cannot be used to show that something is logical. In fact, to a skeptic it would lead to a claim that the trinity must be fiction as well, if an impossible fiction must be used to defend it. The problem that I have with metaphors is that they're far too often the first resort in teaching trinitarian doctrine. You said you assume the Bible will be quoted heavily, but that is not a reasonable assumption to make, based on my experience. My experience in what most Christians know and have been taught about God's triune nature is that they've all been shown metaphors, and never been shown more than one or two verses that kinda-sorta hint at God's triune nature. Showing that there are examples of three-in-one is useless if we don't show what trinitarian doctrine is. Many who have just heard the metaphors still think that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are just roles that a singular person plays at different times. Without scriptures teachings on what the Bible declares to be true about God's nature, and the reasons why Christians believe that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three distinct persons, yet still one God, there is no point in showing logic or illogic. However, once it is established, Biblically, that God definitively tells us that His nature is to eternally be the persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, three persons of one being, in perfect unity as the one true God, then we can move on to assessing if what God has declared can be understood to be consistent with logic. There are some good things to examine. First, it must be realized that the definition of what it is to be a person, and what it is to be God are two different values. There is nothing about God that insists that God must be a single person. 1 person + 1 person + 1 person does = 3 persons, however 1 person + 1 person + 1 person, in the case of the trinity, also = 1 God. This is not an illogical equation, because we can also add 1 glass of water + 1 glass... + 1 glass... = 1 pitcher of water. Glasses and pitchers are different things. What it means to be a glass is different than what it means to be a pitcher, just as "person" and "God" are different. Of course, God is not finite amounts of water. The Father is not one-third of God, even though He is one of three. We must be careful to not say that God is like this pitcher of water, because He is not, we can only show the importance of defining terms and values. Next it could be examined that infinite values are not like finite values. If we take an infinite set, all whole numbers, and divide it in half we can have two infinite sets, odd and even. Neither of these sets is less than infinite, neither has more than each other, and neither has less than the whole. These two sets do not even overlap, there is a clear distinction between odd and even. This shows that it is not illogical to say that an infinite God can be three persons who are each the fullness of God, yet still distinct. Of course, this example has ways it is not like God as well. God is not a set of numbers and cannot so easily be valued. Also, if you happen to be dealing with someone who knows math, they'd realize that there are values greater than infinity (transfinite mathematics is a real field [sm=rollingeyes.gif], one I do not understand). Whatever value mathematicians can dream up, God is greater still. Again, we must be careful not to say that God is like a mathematical set, because there are none like the LORD.

Dred -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/9/2008 3:21:24 PM)
quote: Figmentpez: The problem that I have with metaphors is that they're far too often the first resort in teaching trinitarian doctrine. I agree; there should be more reliance upon scripture. What bothers me is that it seems Trinitarian doctrine is usually not taught at all, though some of the terms are used and may leave a false impression. You seem to be most often worried about an erring in the Oneness Theology direction, but I usually worry about the opposite. That is, that people do think of 3 persons, but imagine God as a committee, much like the Mormons. I hate the 3 Musketeer's analogy: 3 people who like each other, work together well, and don't have disputes among themselves. I see the Bible teaching a much more fundamental unity of being. It seems that many in our churches think of Jesus as being a lesser being than God the Father. They call the Father God, but sometimes seem surprised when someone refers to Jesus as God. Even in the last couple of years, I heard a preacher I respected quite a bit otherwise say that Jesus does not (present tense) know when He is returning. Most of my experience is with Southern Baptists. The SBC statement of faith reads "The eternal triune God reveals Himself to us as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, with distinct personal attributes, but without division of nature, essence, or being." My feeling is that the latter part of that is neglected much more than the former, but you may have a different experience. By the way, though I am big fan of Star Trek, I suspected the mind meld wasn't real [;)]. However, a concept that exists only as an abstraction can be used to make sense of something which is very real. In fact, all of mathematics is really only an abstraction, but most anything with order or structure can be modeled by and better understood through mathematics. By the way, if you are interested in transfinite mathematics, it is one of the mathematical topics I enjoy discussing the most. I suspect that you have enough background to understand a proof for the existence of progressively higher infinities. PM me if you want to discuss that.

Ark_and_saw -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/18/2008 9:53:29 PM)
God was incarnated thru Christ upon the earth. The holy spirit is not a person per se but a reference to the personification of God. Remember Christ said I sit on my Father's throne and ye shall sit on Christ's. In other words, Jesus is the one true God and we are made in the image of Himself on the cross. It was the only way to bring salvation to mankind. Remember God says that He will perform it Himself.

figmentPez -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/19/2008 7:28:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ark_and_saw God was incarnated thru Christ upon the earth. Jesus Christ is God incarnate, however, He is the Son incarnate, not the Father. quote: The holy spirit is not a person per se but a reference to the personification of God. Why would God need a personification? Are you claiming that God is not a person at all? The Holy Spirit is most certainly a person, along with the Father and the Son. This passage from scripture bears witness: John 14: "I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; 17that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you. The Son of God asks His Father to send another Helper, the Holy Spirit. This verse becomes nonsense without proper trinitarian doctrine. quote: Remember Christ said I sit on my Father's throne and ye shall sit on Christ's. Chapter and verse, please.

armydude -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/20/2008 9:22:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JimboFletch Nothing in this world quite captures the essence of the Trinity. Amen. Nothing can capture the essence of the Trinity. Trying to convey that with words is like trying to listen to a toy piano play Handel's "Messiah". The message is simply too majestic for the medium. quote: God the Father is fully God. God the Son is fully God. God the Holy Spirit is fully God. But God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is also fully God. Well said! And bookmarked for quote of the year!

TJO5 -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/21/2008 12:32:40 AM)
A good visual illustration of the Trinity is the Scutum Fidei. Scutum Fidei image Yours in Christ, T.J.

Heavendweller -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (1/26/2008 4:06:35 PM)
ReelVerse, I suggest you read about the Council of Nicaea in 325 and review the Nicene Creed. This council and creed were called to combat the heresy of Arianism, which said that Christ was created by the Father. This council established the doctrine of the Trinity, wrote the Nicene Creed, and declared the diety of Christ in its teaching on the hypostatic union. HD

Kath -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (2/16/2008 3:18:18 PM)
mlculwell Please email community@salemwebnetwork.com concerning the status of your account. Please allow time for a response. Please do not post under this handle or any other until you have heard from the administrator. Sincerely Kath Volunteer Assistant Administrator Please do not reply to this message within the Community. Please do not send me PMs regarding this message as I am unable to discuss it further. Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns. Please allow time for a response. Posts which ignore this warning will be removed without warning and may result in other action in accordance with the Terms of Service.

deliveredarling -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (2/17/2008 2:37:21 PM)
Is the analogy of using a person such as a father who is also a son who is also a husband or grandfather even close? They are all the same person with different functions yet work in unison rather than against each other to fulfill their roles? Is this completely off base?

figmentPez -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (2/18/2008 3:12:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: birdseye Is the analogy of using a person such as a father who is also a son who is also a husband or grandfather even close? They are all the same person with different functions yet work in unison rather than against each other to fulfill their roles? Is this completely off base? Yes, it's completely off-base. See post #5. "God is not a single person." A man may be both a father and a son, but a man is not his own father, or his own son. The Father really is the father of the Son. The Father and the Son are not the same person performing different functions.

FurGodWurLivin -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (2/21/2008 2:22:44 AM)
To the OP, no... your analogy is not "heresy" proper, but it is highly inaccurate. The three persons of the Trinity are not struggling to control the actions of the whole, which is the case of the body, soul, and spirit. There is no analogy that is completely accurate because God is infinite... however, I think I would can this analogy as being especially innacurate. St Patrick (one of my heroes) used a Shamrock as an example of the Trinity. The shamrock (clover) has three leaves/petals and yet is one plant. Once again, it's not completely accurate because it is using our finite world to describe an infinite reality. I can't remember who said it, but someone once described the Trinity as the "Infinite community of single action." That woud seem to be a fairly good description without writing a whole book. Adam

SD456 -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (2/21/2008 6:15:58 PM)
I've heard the analogy of an apple - core, flesh and peel. All separate parts, yet part of the same apple. Still doesn't exactly work since they can't stand apart from each other, but gives the idea of how one God can have three parts to Him. Good luck with your video though.

figmentPez -> RE: Heresy about Trinity? (2/22/2008 7:58:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SD456 I've heard the analogy of an apple - core, flesh and peel. All separate parts, yet part of the same apple. Still doesn't exactly work since they can't stand apart from each other, but gives the idea of how one God can have three parts to Him. Good luck with your video though. The apple analogy also falls apart in that the skin of an apple gives no indication of what the flesh or core look like. If someone had never seen an apple before, and only saw one part, they would not know the other two. That is not the case with God. Jesus says in John 14:7 "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him."

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI