Relationships within the Trinity

Faith & Science Conversation
41

@mitchellmckain, you imply that God is arbitrary and is not interested in revealing the truth to humanity. It reminds me of the serpent who told Eve that YHWH was withholding the truth from her and her husband.

On the other hand Genesis says that God created humans, male and female, in the Image of God. Also Jesus Christ “is the Image of the invisible God.” Col. 1:10 Thus the Bible says that God reveals Godself to be like humans (a little lower than God, Ps 8:5)

Okay, then the question is: Does God choose to limit Godself sometimes and not other times, or does God “limit” Godself always to being just and loving? YHWH also defined Godself by saying I AM WHO I AM. God does not change. God does not lie.

God did not have to create the universe, but God did. God did not have top create humans with all the problems that we create, but God did. God did not have to send Jesus Christ the Second Person of the Trinity to save humanity, but God did. God made decisions which revealed God’s Trinitarian character and God’s full loving nature. God does not withhold God’s Truth, God pours our God’s Truth through the Logos.

Perhaps you are confused by the fact that there are two basic models of the Trinity, the Eastern model called the Monarchian Model. and the Western model called the Egalitarian, which is based on Augustine who wrote the great book, De Trinitate or on the Trinity.

Superficially there is no big difference and both are considered acceptable in terms of doctrine. The Eastern model starts with the Father Who begets the Son. The Father also processes the Holy Spirit.

The Western model also has the Father begetting the Son, but has the procession of the Spirit coming from both the Father and the Son. The difference was one word in the Latin, “filioque,” the Spirit processed from the Father and the Son.

By making the procession of the Holy Spirit a cooperative venture of the Son and the Father it places them in an equal plane. The Eastern model gives all the power to the Father, while the West maintains the equality of the Three Persons

It is generally accepted the Monarchical model is the basis of the subjugation of Church to State in the East. I would say that the Egalitarian model is the basis of Separation of Church and State in the West.

Evangelicals are trying to justify the subordination of State to Church adopting a legalistic Jewish theology and taking the role of the Pharisees

42

Friendly challenge to the community?

Allegation & claim: in the entire Greek OT-NT, the original inspired ancient-to-1st century Greek is 100% consistent:

  1. The One True God The Father is always indicated by the presence of the definite article “the” before “God”, e.g. “o Theos”, “ton Theon” (G3588 G2316), signifying “the [one] God”
  2. The Father’s Word & Spirit are always indicated by the absence of the definite article, signifying “a God-like entity”

“One God, [the] Father, uncreated, invisible, Creator of all, above whom there is no other, after whom there is no other God. And as God is verbal, therefore, He made created things by the [His] Word…”
Irenaeus, Proof of the Apostolic Preaching 5

image
image1455×1052 525 KB

43

For many years I searched through God’s Word for every passage that contained a word for God and a word for one or more of the members of the Triune Godhead. I found over 1000 that met that criteria. When I started collating them, I found they fell into eight groups that identify the eight, and only eight, ways Three can be One. The discussion of these eight groups provide insights into attributes of God that bear on this thread. I also found they weave together to form a startling and edifying symbol historically significant to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. This year that book was published: “The Trouble with the Trinity, A Layman-to-Layman Study of the Biblical Evidence for the Triune Nature of God” - Amazon.com: Carlos F A Pinkham: books, biography, latest update. I do not feel comfortable promoting my work, but I am convinced this work was inspired by the Holy Spirit and I do know it will open your eyes to the careful, compassionate, and copious ways God is revealed to be Triune in the Bible.

44

What did the term “Father” imply, in 1st century AD Judea ?

Jesus did not say he had a “brother” in heaven, or a “friend” in heaven, or a “twin” in heaven

He said he had a “Father” in heaven – every 1st century Jew would have known that implied total authority over the entire family, as even the sons of Jacob deferred to their father as long as he breathed

Jesus (Yehoshua) was no “Absalom” or “son of Eli”

45

@ErikNelson Erik,
You need to read the Prodigal Son.

46

Wayne Grudem’s article directly addresses that particular parable.

Clearly, the prodigal son represents a repentant Sinner seeking God’s forgiveness. Whereas the dutiful elder son represents someone who has been faithful their entire life.

Also clear is the fact that he older brother is so envious and upset because quote unquote. He had always done the will of his father, he had always been obedient. He had always been submissive to the authority of his father.

Surely you would acknowledge that Jesus was a good and dutiful son. In a first century Jewish context. That means obeying and submitting to the authority of the father.

Jesus was no Absolom or son of Eli Correct?

47

The way I understand the parable is that the older brother represents those who consider themselves the insiders … the ‘righteous’ ones … the ‘should’ve been’ chosen ones; hence their indignation when the father makes such a ruckus over their wayward, proven-to-be-profligate, ‘good-for-nothin’ younger brother just because he came back (and that only under duress). If Jesus were the older brother, then we wouldn’t see the older brother bitterly separating himself from the father over his father’s lavish inclusion. No - this is a very pointed parable that lets the Pharisees (and also any/all of us religious folks who fancy that we must be the ‘insiders’) get a look at God’s generous heart and then at their/our own hearts in comparison.

1 Like
48

Agree. While there is a lot going on, and I can place myself in the story as either of the two sons at times, to place Jesus as either son is in error. The Father is rightly seen as God, as Jesus.

49

My point when I said that @ErikNelson read the parable is that the PS does not portray the strict authoritarian patriarchal family that he said was the standard. I am sure that the Father did hot want the younger son to leave, but there is no indication He made an effort to stop him. On the contrary the Father made every effort to give the younger son his share of the wealth, which he did not have to do, I think.

The problem with the PS was not that he le3ft, but that he misspent the money he was given. When he came to his senses he realized that we would have been much better off back at home. If he had saved his money, or found a good job, this would not have happened.

Another alternative would have been to begin a life of crime. Sadly many people when they find that their foolishness leads to problems, instead of admitting their mistakes, they double down on their pride and dig a deeper hole for themselves, but he did not.

The PS admitted his mistakes and asked for forgiveness which his father granted, accepted him back as His son, not as a servant. God demonstrated that membership in God’s Family is right relationship, not strict obedience. The dutiful son refused to accept his brother back and became angry with the Father for spending money welcoming him back. He was out of right relationship with the Father because of his unloving legalistic spirit.

Jesus through His parables created a new family structure, that became the structure for the Trinity. The Trinity is based on Divine concepts and values, not human concepts and values.

50

The Father has the Authority to wield His Authority howsoever He chooses

That the Father permits us sinners the “free will” to choose to stray into error without “erecting force-fields around us” has, evidently, been the long-standing decision of the Father on how to interact with His terrestrial creation

The Father’s long-suffering leniency (2 Peter 3:9) is not a “sign of weakness” or of lack of ultimate Authority – He wields His ultimate Authority with generosity & kindness & long-suffering tolerance

51

This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.