How to explain the Trinity

[Great Fiction]

I was thinking of that first point when I made that description, that is part of the reason why I said that it is more complex than that. Although our corporeal body is not eternal(yet), Jesus' body is eternal. So, I think that description still fits.

I understand
Thus when corporeal morality transfigures to immortality the application becomes sound?

 

[Fish Catcher Jim]

The reason I said that the title Angel of the Lord is an accurate description for God the Son is because He is the Word of God. An angel of God is a messenger of God. What does a messenger of God do but deliver a message, either in the form of words or a display of God's power(although indirectly if from a created being such as angel)? God the Son is the Word of God and manifestation of His power. So in this way the title The Angel of the Lord is an accurate one, and as already shown in scripture actually God.

So then Mykuhl show me with scripture for I am not grasping this one bit.

 

[Cturtle]

You will need to complete your analogy full circle in order to support Abidicates analogy that the Holy Spirit is the electricity of the Father in conjunction with your channel of faith.

So if faith (the channel) is the wiring and the Holy Spirit is the electricity?
then.....
Could the plastic poly-coat on the wire be the faith and the copper wire be works since faith without works is dead.
Then we could we could also assign love as being the breaker-box since faith worketh by love
Then also we could say that love never fails and love "is" God; for "God is love" which would say that God is analogous to the breaker box also.
Then also God sent His son who ushered in the Holy Ghost "another comforter" thus we could assign Jesus as all the controls in a house that "turns on the electricity"

Ok, just say it, I went to far

Sounds like you had way to much fun with this analogy

 

[Brother Paul]

Yet the analogous corporeal body is not eternal, where as the mind and spirit are; a Monotheistic Trinitarian will believe three persons or three connected-entities derive from a same-eternal-substance ("one" substance) that is "eternal."

Yet forgive my antagonism, as I do understand your point for a tripartite analogy. Many people use the egg in similar where antagonism would argue against the egg because of its ability to separate as three different kinds of matter in a solid state. The egg is triadic.

"Tripartite" is an excellent terminological descriptor opposed to the word triadic which describes three individual units working in harmony. Also the word "triune" is preferred by some to say its not just one substance in three parts but three parts "in" one substance. Semantics are critical for many Monotheistic Trinitarians.

Yes this is so true! For me He is One in three, and the three in Unity, not three as one (which is a corporation). I believe the distinction as well as the order of understanding is essential. Each member has their own role and function...only the Father knows the day of the Son's return, only the Son suffered in His humanity, only through the Holy Spirit can the Son (in whom the Father dwells and He in Him) dwell in us and we in Him (John 17. Messiah's prayer) and so on...this is the will of the one God! I do know others who emphasize the threeness with such distinction it makes people accuse us of Polytheism.

 

[krossquad]

Greetings:
Seems like the first person has purchased a lot of goats.The second person has the almost impossible task of to turning them into sheep.The third person puts the smell of a new car into them.Hey,,I married one of them.
bye

 

[Apologia]

The trinity is basically the reason why Muslims are not Christians. They don't understand it. But I heard this explanation online on YouTube on the Trinity.

Here is how it goes:
Since God is omnipotent, He can be at multiple places at once. And He can be in multiple forms at once, at the same time.

That is what I remember from the explanation.

Here is my version, though it might sound more "philosophical":
The Godhead is made of three components. All are equal, and God cannot be without each of them. Three distinct persons, but they all make up God, or the Godhead, and they cannot be complete without each other all together.
My theory is not complete yet, but that is what I think.

How would you explain the Trinity?

The most elementary response you can give when people ask "how can there be 3 gods when you claim there to be One" - Instead of viewing it as 1 + 1 + 1 = 3, view it as 1 * 1 * 1 = 1 This is simple math anyone can do!

 

[Great Fiction]

The most elementary response you can give when people ask "how can there be 3 gods when you claim there to be One" - Instead of viewing it as 1 + 1 + 1 = 3, view it as 1 * 1 * 1 = 1 This is simple math anyone can do!

However the mathematical antagonist could say that your calculative strategy to represent God could also insinuate that "God is all matter, all people, all space and all beings"; also to potential "any person, any space, any matter in a fundamental state, and any being."

Thus the equation could represent "Pantheism" or "a wild card configuration that could use any person in the equation at will."

Can you build the equation to also exclude anything that is not God also?

 

[Apologia]

However the mathematical antagonist could say that your calculative strategy to represent God could also insinuate that "God is all matter, all people, all space and all beings"; also to potential "any person, any space, any matter in a fundamental state, and any being."

Thus the equation could represent "Pantheism" or "a wild card configuration that could use any person in the equation at will."

Can you build the equation to also exclude anything that is not God also?

I honestly love your commentary and replies, they are quite intriguing and seemly mind bending in a way I'm honestly not sure how I would answer this question, if posed by the mathematical antagonist.

 

[Great Fiction]

I honestly love your commentary and replies, they are quite intriguing and seemly mind bending in a way I'm honestly not sure how I would answer this question, if posed by the mathematical antagonist.

Thank you for the very nice compliment Brian, I am highly intrigued that you would use math to define the God-head. Its an interesting approach

 

[Apologia]

Thank you for the very nice compliment Brian, I am highly intrigued that you would use math to define the God-head. Its an interesting approach

I saw this used to open discussion with a Muslim that was trying to say that Christianity thinks there are 3 Gods. This of course is not my 'go to' (so to speak); I also found it intriguing. The Trinity is more fascinating to explain using the Word of God.