Trinity question: What does the word "person" mean?

[teixidoj]

Brother Christian2,

Great links, it did not give me the clear answer that I was looking for. When I try to comprehend the Trinity as a finite being that I am. I think about the Borgs in Star Trek, even though they were seperate physical beings; they were part of one collective (Just a mere assumption on my part). I can imagine God taking a piece of himself (Only an analogy) and creating the human being of Jesus Christ using Mary has a vessel. This may contradict John's revelation when Jesus said that "I am the Alpha and the Omega" (Wow, I'm really confused).

We know that Gmon beleives that Jesus and God are one being, but then who was Jesus praying to in the garden of Gethseme (I know I spelled it wrong); and who was Jesus talking to on the cross when he said "Father, why have you forsaken me". In my humble mind I ask myself, if Jesus and God are one being; then who is Jesus calling father?

Again brothers, I am not trying to start a debate here nor am I saying that I am right and you are wrong. These are what I feel are legitimate questions concerning this topic.

Regards,

John...

[Dazed and Confused]

Brothers,

I do not mean to sound negative, but no one here has been able to give a clear answer either biblical or otherwise on the Trinity. Despite the Trinity being a christian theory, there is no irrefutable evidence that the Trinity is a biblical fact. I am not saying that there is or there isn't a Trinity; I just know that this theory is completely over my head and I will pray and be patient that our God the master of time and space will one day provide me with the answer. I do believe that the Trinity is a possibility that our God the creator of all life can be in more than one place at the same time.

God's triune nature can be demonstrated typologically in chapter 25 of the book of Exodus, "Let them construct a sanctuary for Me, that I may dwell among them." It's here were we will find the three persons of the trinity within the tabernacle and since it would be God's dwelling place among the Hebrews it would have to reflect His true nature. God commands the Hebrews to construct three primary artifacts for His dwelling place, sound familiar? All three of these artifacts were to be overlaid with gold, which represents God's eternal nature because gold doesn't oxidize or rust as other precious metals. Gold has an eternal value, as does our Lord.

"They shall construct an ark of acacia wood...You shall overlay it with pure gold, inside and out you shall overlay it, and you shall make a gold molding around it...You shall put the mercy seat on top of the ark, and in the ark you shall put the testimony which I will give to you...There I will meet with you; and from above the mercy seat." (The Father)

"You shall make a table of acacia wood...You shall overlay it with pure gold and make a gold border around it...You shall make its dishes and its pans and its jars and its bowls with which to pour drink offerings; you shall make them of pure gold...You shall set the bread of the Presence on the table before Me at all times." (The Son)

"Then you shall make a lampstand of pure gold. The lampstand and its base and its shaft are to be made of hammered work; its cups, its bulbs and its flowers shall be of one piece with it. Then you shall make its lamps seven in number; and they shall mount its lamps so as to shed light on the space in front of it." (The Holy Spirit)

A point to consider is when Jesus Christ was here during His earthly ministry, that the second temple did not contain the ark of the covenant. This is most likely because Christ Jesus could not be in two places at once. He could not be dwelling in the temple, while He was manifested in the flesh. I know it's not academic, however for me it's irrefutable confirmation of God's triune nature. Teixidoj if you want a different typological example of the trinity in the Old Testament let me know, it's not everyone's cup of tea.

[DannyM]

I am the only Christian on this board. They had more, some I invited, who have left. They are sensitive and I choose my words well in order not to insult them.

The owner of the site is a friend of mine and we have known each other, via discussion boards for years. I didn't find out until recently that he is a former Christian, now a Jew. He and some of other Jews I know have been a tremendous help to me in addressing the allegations against the Bible made by Muslims.

What do you think? If you haven't had the experience of talking with Jews, this might be a good place to do it.

Christian2.. Can I see this link? I promise not to blow your cover..

Thanks.
G -

Can I [!!] join in? I'll be discrete ...

[DannyM]

Christian2,

Are you specifically looking for scriptural evidence? You've been given some great theological and philosophical evidence, but Gman has provided some quality evidence form scripture... I'll give you some more.

Genesis 1:2 "... and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

Genesis 1:26 "The God said, Let us make man in our image, in our likeness..."

Psalm 2:7 "...You are my Son; today I have become your Father."

Psalm 2:12 "Kiss the Son, lest he be angry and you be destroyed in your way..."

John 1:1-2 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning."

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son..."

Philippians 2:5-8 "Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God..."

Acts 5:3,4 "...how is it that Satan has filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit... 4 ...You have not lied to men but to God."

John 16:13 "But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you..."

John 16:15 "All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you."

NOW HERE'S THE KILLER:

Colossians 2:9 "For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and you have been given fullness in Christ..."

Christian2, if you need more then shout me brother!!

[teixidoj]

Brothers,

I have read those scriptures and yes, many of the scritures show that Jesus and God the father are one; but what about the verses that I pointed out, do they not read has Jesus and God being two separate beings? I personally beleive that Jesus and God are the same entity, but I cannot prove this point blank in the bible; because I cannot give a clear answer on who was Jesus praying to in the garden of Gethseme and why would he be praying to anyone if he was God the father. I also do not have an answer to someone that would ask me, if Jesus and God are the same being; then who is the son that God has sent in John 3:16? If God and Jesus are one, then would not John 3:16 would read that God sent himself?

Your thoughts,

John...

[Canuckster1127]

Brothers,

I have read those scriptures and yes, many of the scritures show that Jesus and God the father are one; but what about the verses that I pointed out, do they not read has Jesus and God being two separate beings? I personally beleive that Jesus and God are the same entity, but I cannot prove this point blank in the bible; because I cannot give a clear answer on who was Jesus praying to in the garden of Gethseme and why would he be praying to anyone if he was God the father. I also do not have an answer to someone that would ask me, if Jesus and God are the same being; then who is the son that God has sent in John 3:16? If God and Jesus are one, then would not John 3:16 would read that God sent himself?

Your thoughts,

John...

You're projecting human limitations upon God. We're made in God's image. God is not made in ours.

The trinity or Godhead reconciles all the elements you're noting with the understanding that God is three, yet one in essence. There's an element of mystery to it that transcends human experience.

You've heard of the old image used in philosophy to explaing perspective? 4 blind men seek to describe an elephant. One pushes on the side and says, "This elephant is like a wall", one grabs onto a leg and says, "No it is like a tree", another grabs the trunk and states, "No, it is like a snake" and then another grabs the tail and says, "You're all wrong, it is like a rope."

All are partially right, but individually incomplete.

We understand and interpret the world, physical and spiritual, through the lens of our human understanding and experience. However, God is not subject to the limitations we are. So, when we look humanly at a Father and a Son, we see them as separate, unique and each their own person. God is not human. God is a spirit. He is omnipresent so the idea of that God can be two persons at the same time is possible, as is being three. By the Holy Spirit God is present in the lives and hearts of His children and yet He each element of that presence is not a separate person in God's existence.

The trinity is a doctrine that takes all the scriptural evidence of who God says He is and what He is like. We can understand to an extent when we suspend our disbelief and accept what is said. Any attempt on our part to explain it in the context of our human understanding, experience and knowledge however is going to break down at some level, because we're limited in our understanding and perspective but God is not.

bart

[B. W.]

...You're projecting human limitations upon God. We're made in God's image. God is not made in ours.

The trinity or Godhead reconciles all the elements you're noting with the understanding that God is three, yet one in essence. There's an element of mystery to it that transcends human experience.

You've heard of the old image used in philosophy to explaing perspective? 4 blind men seek to describe an elephant. One pushes on the side and says, "This elephant is like a wall", one grabs onto a leg and says, "No it is like a tree", another grabs the trunk and states, "No, it is like a snake" and then another grabs the tail and says, "You're all wrong, it is like a rope."

All are partially right, but individually incomplete.

We understand and interpret the world, physical and spiritual, through the lens of our human understanding and experience. However, God is not subject to the limitations we are. So, when we look humanly at a Father and a Son, we see them as separate, unique and each their own person. God is not human. God is a spirit. He is omnipresent so the idea of that God can be two persons at the same time is possible, as is being three. By the Holy Spirit God is present in the lives and hearts of His children and yet He each element of that presence is not a separate person in God's existence.

The trinity is a doctrine that takes all the scriptural evidence of who God says He is and what He is like. We can understand to an extent when we suspend our disbelief and accept what is said. Any attempt on our part to explain it in the context of our human understanding, experience and knowledge however is going to break down at some level, because we're limited in our understanding and perspective but God is not.

bart

Adding to what Bart says about 'there being in the Trinity (the Godhead) an element of mystery to it that transcends human our own experience,' then look at these two scriptures:

Isaiah 40:18 - To whom then will you liken God? Or what likeness will you compare to Him?

Isaiah 40:25 - "To whom then will you liken Me, Or to whom shall I be equal?" says the Holy One.

There is none like the Lord as it is written:

2 Samuel 7:22 - Therefore You are great, O Lord GOD. For there is none like You, nor is there any God besides You, according to all that we have heard with our ears.

Psalm 86:8 - Among the gods there is none like You, O Lord; Nor are there any works like Your works.

Psalm 89:6 - For who in the heavens can be compared to the LORD? Who among the sons of the mighty can be likened to the LORD?

Think upon this for a moment:

Now, if God is in the same likeness of oneness as any other false god or thing, then these bible verses are in error as this cannot be because there is none like God! There is no likeness that can adequately compare with God (Isaiah 40:25).

That is why the Orthodox Doctrine (Christian) of the divine Trinity is termed as a mystery because it retains and proves that there is none like God: One God in three distinct persons of one divine essence. Truly, None like Him!

This is in keeping with how in the bible God describes and reveals himself to be. For a few more examples see below:

Read Isaiah 40:1-31 - on your own and note the usage of third person speech God uses when speaking of himself. Note verse 10 and 11 as well who is speaking in throughout this chapter and then note transition in verses 25-31 (Isaiah 40:25-31 — the type and part of speech used by the Lord referring to himself)

Note Isaiah 59:16

Isaiah 52:10

Isaiah 53:1

Isaiah 63:12

Psalms 98:1-9

Psalms 89:13-18

Look at Psalms 89:13, 14, 15 - You have a mighty arm; Strong is Your hand, and high is Your right hand. 14 Righteousness and justice are the foundation of Your throne; Mercy and truth go before Your face (pāniym) 15 Blessed are the people who know the joyful sound! They walk, O LORD, in the light of Your countenance (pāniym).

Note that pāniym: is a masculine plural noun… and can read faces or countenances! Refers to the distinct attributes of the Son and Holy Spirit…Notice in verse 14 two words are used — 'mercy and truth' and note verse 13 three distinct parts — You Have (denotes essence) mighty arm — then another arm mentioned along with High Right Hand.

Mercy and truth — Note John 1:14 about Jesus and what John 14:26, John 15:26, and John 16:13-15 says…

Yes, God is One and there is none like him in the type — essence - of his own oneness! There is in the Trinity (the Godhead) an element of mystery to it that transcends human our own experience... which is very scripturally founded.

Psalms 89:6 - For who in the heavens can be compared to the LORD? Who among the sons of the mighty can be likened to the LORD?

Bible quotes are all from the NKJV
-
-
-

[Christian2]

I am the only Christian on this board. They had more, some I invited, who have left. They are sensitive and I choose my words well in order not to insult them.

The owner of the site is a friend of mine and we have known each other, via discussion boards for years. I didn't find out until recently that he is a former Christian, now a Jew. He and some of other Jews I know have been a tremendous help to me in addressing the allegations against the Bible made by Muslims.

What do you think? If you haven't had the experience of talking with Jews, this might be a good place to do it.

Christian2.. Can I see this link? I promise not to blow your cover..

Thanks.
G -

Can I [!!] join in? I'll be discrete ...

Wouldn't it be great if 50 Christians showed up as a result of this topic? LOL

I'll send you a PM with links.

[DannyM]

...You're projecting human limitations upon God. We're made in God's image. God is not made in ours.

The trinity or Godhead reconciles all the elements you're noting with the understanding that God is three, yet one in essence. There's an element of mystery to it that transcends human experience.

You've heard of the old image used in philosophy to explaing perspective? 4 blind men seek to describe an elephant. One pushes on the side and says, "This elephant is like a wall", one grabs onto a leg and says, "No it is like a tree", another grabs the trunk and states, "No, it is like a snake" and then another grabs the tail and says, "You're all wrong, it is like a rope."

All are partially right, but individually incomplete.

We understand and interpret the world, physical and spiritual, through the lens of our human understanding and experience. However, God is not subject to the limitations we are. So, when we look humanly at a Father and a Son, we see them as separate, unique and each their own person. God is not human. God is a spirit. He is omnipresent so the idea of that God can be two persons at the same time is possible, as is being three. By the Holy Spirit God is present in the lives and hearts of His children and yet He each element of that presence is not a separate person in God's existence.

The trinity is a doctrine that takes all the scriptural evidence of who God says He is and what He is like. We can understand to an extent when we suspend our disbelief and accept what is said. Any attempt on our part to explain it in the context of our human understanding, experience and knowledge however is going to break down at some level, because we're limited in our understanding and perspective but God is not.

bart

Adding to what Bart says about 'there being in the Trinity (the Godhead) an element of mystery to it that transcends human our own experience,' then look at these two scriptures:

Isaiah 40:18 - To whom then will you liken God? Or what likeness will you compare to Him?

Isaiah 40:25 - "To whom then will you liken Me, Or to whom shall I be equal?" says the Holy One.

There is none like the Lord as it is written:

2 Samuel 7:22 - Therefore You are great, O Lord GOD. For there is none like You, nor is there any God besides You, according to all that we have heard with our ears.

Psalm 86:8 - Among the gods there is none like You, O Lord; Nor are there any works like Your works.

Psalm 89:6 - For who in the heavens can be compared to the LORD? Who among the sons of the mighty can be likened to the LORD?

Think upon this for a moment:

Now, if God is in the same likeness of oneness as any other false god or thing, then these bible verses are in error as this cannot be because there is none like God! There is no likeness that can adequately compare with God (Isaiah 40:25).

That is why the Orthodox Doctrine (Christian) of the divine Trinity is termed as a mystery because it retains and proves that there is none like God: One God in three distinct persons of one divine essence. Truly, None like Him!

This is in keeping with how in the bible God describes and reveals himself to be. For a few more examples see below:

Read Isaiah 40:1-31 - on your own and note the usage of third person speech God uses when speaking of himself. Note verse 10 and 11 as well who is speaking in throughout this chapter and then note transition in verses 25-31 (Isaiah 40:25-31 — the type and part of speech used by the Lord referring to himself)

Note Isaiah 59:16

Isaiah 52:10

Isaiah 53:1

Isaiah 63:12

Psalms 98:1-9

Psalms 89:13-18

Look at Psalms 89:13, 14, 15 - You have a mighty arm; Strong is Your hand, and high is Your right hand. 14 Righteousness and justice are the foundation of Your throne; Mercy and truth go before Your face (pāniym) 15 Blessed are the people who know the joyful sound! They walk, O LORD, in the light of Your countenance (pāniym).

Note that pāniym: is a masculine plural noun… and can read faces or countenances! Refers to the distinct attributes of the Son and Holy Spirit…Notice in verse 14 two words are used — 'mercy and truth' and note verse 13 three distinct parts — You Have (denotes essence) mighty arm — then another arm mentioned along with High Right Hand.

Mercy and truth — Note John 1:14 about Jesus and what John 14:26, John 15:26, and John 16:13-15 says…

Yes, God is One and there is none like him in the type — essence - of his own oneness! There is in the Trinity (the Godhead) an element of mystery to it that transcends human our own experience... which is very scripturally founded.

Psalms 89:6 - For who in the heavens can be compared to the LORD? Who among the sons of the mighty can be likened to the LORD?

Bible quotes are all from the NKJV
-
-
-

Cracking post, B.W.

[teixidoj]

Brother Bart,

Thank you for your explanation; I do agree that the Trinity is a mystery that I cannot explain to others with scripture alone. It is evident in the bible that talks about God and Jesus being one being, but the bible also talks about Jesus and God being two separate beings; is this a contradictions or what does it mean that Jesus will sit on the right had side of the father, if the father and son are one? Yes, I am looking at the father and the son humanly, but what choice do I have; I am only human. I do believe that God can be in more than one place at the same time and that the theory of the Trinity is a possibility. I do believe that the father and son are one, but this belief on mine is based on faith and not facts.

[Canuckster1127]

Brother Bart,

Thank you for your explanation; I do agree that the Trinity is a mystery that I cannot explain to others with scripture alone. It is evident in the bible that talks about God and Jesus being one being, but the bible also talks about Jesus and God being two separate beings; is this a contradictions or what does it mean that Jesus will sit on the right had side of the father, if the father and son are one? Yes, I am looking at the father and the son humanly, but what choice do I have; I am only human. I do believe that God can be in more than one place at the same time and that the theory of the Trinity is a possibility. I do believe that the father and son are one, but this belief on mine is based on faith and not facts.

No problem. There ultimately is a faith element to it and the reason we accept it is becauase we accept the Bible as part of God's special revelation and we accept Jesus Christ as who He says He is and what He says about God.

For me, that fact that the Trinity doesn't make perfect human sense is an indication that it is not something simply made up by man. If man were to attempt to create God in man's image then we'd have a nice neat little picture of God that made perfect sense to us and met all the needs and expectations we have. If God however is more than we are, then I would expect the revelation we're given to stretch us and force us beyond our limits and understandings.

There's nothing wrong with trying to understand it as best as we can and then coming to a point where we admit we can't adequately describe it to a skeptic's satisfaction. Truth like this is not something we arrive at, it's something we are led to and it requires patience and humility on our parts to accept our own limitations and extend grace to others who may not be at the same place we are currently.

[Jac3510]

Thank you for your explanation; I do agree that the Trinity is a mystery that I cannot explain to others with scripture alone. It is evident in the bible that talks about God and Jesus being one being, but the bible also talks about Jesus and God being two separate beings; is this a contradictions or what does it mean that Jesus will sit on the right had side of the father, if the father and son are one? Yes, I am looking at the father and the son humanly, but what choice do I have; I am only human. I do believe that God can be in more than one place at the same time and that the theory of the Trinity is a possibility. I do believe that the father and son are one, but this belief on mine is based on faith and not facts.

Teixidoj,

I know there are a lot of people who are willing to write off the Trinity as a mystery that we simply have to accept by faith. Plenty of Christians are willing to live with that. They tell non-believers that is the way it is. I'm sure, though, you can imagine the difficulty a non-Christian has in such a statement . . . it makes no sense for God to demand us to assent to an idea that is, by all logical reasoning, self-refuting. He does this in no other area of life. Why this one? That would be like discovering the very bones of Jesus, finding definitive proof that all the gospels were forgeries, that Moses never existed, and that every account in the Bible is a mere fairly tale, etc., and still telling people that we ought to just accept the Bible on faith. So what if there is empirical evidence it is false? Wouldn't that just be our human understanding being limited?

No, God made us with a rational mind for a reason.

With all due respect to those Christians who are willing and able to accept the Trinity on mere faith, that's not the basis on which I accept it, nor is it a proper basis, I think, for any sort of apologetic.

To directly answer the question in your quoted post above, there is no logical contradiction between the Scripture's speaking of Jesus and God and one and many beings. The reason is in the distinction between a person and a being. A being may or may not be a person. A person may or may not be a being. This goes deeper into the definitions of ideas like substances, accidental and essential properties, personhood, etc. The bottom line, though, is that there is nothing logically contradictory in saying multiple persons can subsist in a single being. The only way to make it contradictory is to assume that a person is a being in a one-to-one fashion, which is not necessarily the case. Personhood is grounded in a being. It is not a being itself, anymore than than the redness of the apple, which is in the apple, is the apple itself.

You can also make a purely rational case that there must be a God within whom exists a plurality of persons. In very short form, it goes as follows:

1. God, by definition, has all perfections within Himself
2. Love is a perfection
3. God, therefore, has love within Himself
4. That which is perfect can lack nothing
5. God, therefore, can lack nothing
6. Love, to be love, must be directed at another person
7. God, therefore, to be God, requires another person to love
8. God, therefore, must have multiple persons within Himself

To state it again, if God is love, then He must have someone to love. But we cannot say that God requires anything outside of Himself, so He must find multiple persons within Himself if He is to be God at all. In short, having a plurality within God is the only way to logically hold that a perfect God exists. If you deny a perfect God exists, then you have all the problems that come with a non-theistic world . . . the biggest being the problem of contingency.

Does any of this make the Trinity easy? No, of course not, but nothing, really is easy. It is, however, understandable, just like everything else in God's revelation--both General and Special--if you put your mind to it.

Since, then, the arguments for a perfect God are so powerful, the fact that He exists in a plurality of persons is equally proven; thus, we find no surprise when we find the Bible speaking of multiple persons in the Godhead.

God bless

[Canuckster1127]

That argument can be applied to tritheism as well. Further, it doesn't prove three.

All human arguments, including the one you posit, break down at some level on a purely rational basis.

Don't get me wrong. I appreciate the argument. It ties to my views in terms of perichorises and I'm all for using every rational means to come to an understanding of the person and nature of God to the greatest extent possible. I'll draw the line, without apology, at asserting that God can be fully understood on a purely rational basis. The infinite cannot be fully understood by the finite without breaking down somewhere.

There's a certain underlying arrogance (and I'm applying this to the position, not to you personally Chris, as I know such is not your intent) in presuming that no mystery exists in the person and existence of God. It assumes that God is familiar and reducable to the understanding of a finite man. Frankly, I think it elevates man and reduces God in a manner that is inconsistent with what I know of Christ and understand in the scriptures.

One can certainly go too far in the other direction and emphasize mystery to the marginalization of rationality. That's not a desirable situation either.

I'll choose to reject either extreme and accept that there is an inherent tension between the rational and the irrational (or the hidden if you prefer that term) and that indeed includes mystery, of which at some point faith is indeed involved.

[Dazed and Confused]

No problem. There ultimately is a faith element to it and the reason we accept it is becauase we accept the Bible as part of God's special revelation and we accept Jesus Christ as who He says He is and what He says about God.

I had to mull this over for a minute or two...I believe what you are stating here is that the trinity is taught and validated within scripture, but our ability to completely understand this concept will always be limited in scope due to the fact that we are finite and God is infinite?

For me, that fact that the Trinity doesn't make perfect human sense is an indication that it is not something simply made up by man.

The best example for myself is the relational aspects of the trinity. It appears God's institution of marriage mirrors the relational aspects of the Godhead. The Father always honors the Son, the Son always honors the Father, and the Spirit always honors both of them. Love is not self seeking, but desires to glorify the other. Just as the husband honors the wife, the wife honors the husband, and a child honors both parents. These are both self contained & self existing triune units capable of loving each other and having intimate fellowship, with no need of any external relational entities. It makes perfect sense to me relationally anyhow.

[Jac3510]

That argument can be applied to tritheism as well. Further, it doesn't prove three.

1. It cannot be applied to tritheism, for tritheism has three perfect beings, which is philosophically absurd. That which is perfect lacks absolutely nothing. Yet to be different is to be different by something. If two (or three, or more) beings are absolutely equivalent in every way, lacking absolutely nothing, then they differ by nothing, meaning they are actually the same. This is well established and known as Leibniz' Law of the Indiscernibility of Identicals, and is more technically stated thus:

(x)(y)[(x=y)->(P)(Px<-->Py)]

which can be read as follows: For any x and for any y, if "they" are identical to each other, then for any property P, P will be true of x if and only if P is true of y. Or, you could but the law this way:

(x)(y) [(x=y)->*(x=y)]

which can be read as follows: for all x and y, if x is identical to y, then, necessarily, x is identical to y.

So, again, no, the argument I posited most certainly cannot be applied to tritheism, for, by definition, there can only be one perfect Being.

2. I never said that the argument proves three persons. I spoke only of a plurality. I'm fine with the fact that we lack sufficient information from nature itself to conclude that the plurality in the Godhead is limited to Three Persons. For that, we need Scripture. However, again, we do not need the first word of Scripture to prove that there is a plurality of persons within the Godhead, however many that may be.

All human arguments, including the one you posit, break down at some level on a purely rational basis.

Then show me where mine breaks down. Assertions arguments do not make. Of course, I could turn your assertion back on you . . . does the argument that all human arguments eventually break down on some purely rational level itself eventually break down on some purely rational level? Such a statement seems rather self-defeating, to me.

Don't get me wrong. I appreciate the argument. It ties to my views in terms of perichorises and I'm all for using every rational means to come to an understanding of the person and nature of God to the greatest extent possible. I'll draw the line, without apology, at asserting that God can be fully understood on a purely rational basis. The infinite cannot be fully understood by the finite without breaking down somewhere.

Ah, I learned a new word: perichoresis. Much obliged. It's always nice to learn something new

As to your line, doesn't it take a rational comprehension of a thing to declare that it can or cannot be rationally comprehended? To say something is impossible to be understood, even fully, seems to me like saying, "It is impossible to have any knowledge of X." Of course, in so saying, you are asserting some level of knowledge about X . . .

In any case, even if you are right that God can't be fully understood, that's beside the point, as I've hardly argued that I fully understand God. I've simply argued that the Trinity is not some mysterious notion that can only be argued for, understood, and accepted on faith. Quite the contrary, it is rather easy to grasp and prove once you have studied a bit of metaphysics. Forgive me if that sounds at all arrogant. I just don't see why anyone has any trouble with it, anymore than I see why anyone has any trouble with any other concept in reality, such as the need for justice, the need for Christ's death and resurrection, the necessity of God's existence, or any other such idea.

There's a certain underlying arrogance (and I'm applying this to the position, not to you personally Chris, as I know such is not your intent) in presuming that no mystery exists in the person and existence of God. It assumes that God is familiar and reducable to the understanding of a finite man. Frankly, I think it elevates man and reduces God in a manner that is inconsistent with what I know of Christ and understand in the scriptures.

I would agree with this. Of course, I'm sure you are aware that classical theology, far from asserting that there is no mystery in God, actually asserts that in the end, God is pure mystery. That is, classical theology asserts that we can never know what God is at all, but rather only what He is not. Put still differently, classical theology ultimately embraces what is known as negative theology. One quote from Aquinas should be sufficient to demonstrate the point:

• When the existence of a thing has been ascertained there remains the further question of the manner of its existence, in order that we may know its essence. Now, because we cannot know what God is, but rather what He is not, we have no means for considering how God is, but rather how He is not.

I would venture to say that philosophers take the mystery of God far more seriously than most theologians, in that most theologians actually think they know something about who or what God actually is, failing to recognize, as they do, that all that can be said about positively God is analogical at best. So yes, I agree with you here. There is mystery in God. A great mystery, in fact! But the mystery is certainly nothing like the Trinity.

One can certainly go too far in the other direction and emphasize mystery to the marginalization of rationality. That's not a desirable situation either.

Yes, quite right. I say, we are on a roll of agreement.

I'll choose to reject either extreme and accept that there is an inherent tension between the rational and the irrational (or the hidden if you prefer that term) and that indeed includes mystery, of which at some point faith is indeed involved.

I'm not comfortable with the term "tension." And while I much prefer "hidden" to "irrational" (it is quite a stretch to refer to anything about God as irrational!), I see no problems of any kind between what is known rationally and what cannot be known at all, rationally or otherwise. Now, there are certain things that could not have been known about God unless He chose to reveal them to us. In fact, to be technical, the only things we know about God is that which He has chosen to reveal to us. Some things we know from general revelation, some from special, some from both, but that doesn't mean that which is known from general is rational and that which is known from special is non-rational, knowable only by faith. To the contrary, I find faith deeply rational. Let's take an argument for the Trinity:

1. The Bible, being infallible, is always correct;
2. The Bible teaches that God is a Trinity;
3. Therefore, God is a Trinity.

Now if that isn't a rational argument, I don't know what is. I don't have to accept (2) on faith. I can see it with my own eyeballs. I don't even have to accept (1) on faith. It is provable this way:

1. Jesus, being God, is infallible, and is thus always right;
2. Jesus teaches that the Bible is always right;
3. Therefore, the Bible is always right.

Again, I don't need to accept (2) on faith. It is a matter of historical record. I don't have to accept (1) on faith, either, as it is a matter of historical record, which can be demonstrated via the Resurrection.

My point to all this is that I see a false distinction between that which is of rationality and that which is of faith. Faith is simply that which accepts something as true. Everything any of us know about Jesus and God and anything else, spiritual or physical, we know because we have learned it and have been given reason to believe it. Perhaps the reasons upon which we assented are bad reasons. Perhaps our beliefs are unjustified, but we still reached them by employing our mental faculties

Anyway, I'm not sure where you would fall in with all of this. I just hope that people like teixidoj don't walk away from this thread with the idea that they can't really know if things like the Trinity are true, but instead, must simply embrace them in a shear act of faith. Peter says to always be ready with a reason, not to always be ready with a testimony of faith.

God bless