The Holy Trinity and Holy Tetrad

[melodious]

It seems that most Christians do not even know the correct formula of the original Trinity doctrine. So I'm dedicating a thread for debate on the subject. I shall give my version and then leave it open for debate and/or comments.

In my opinion, this is the correct formula according to the original Christian teaching that was adopted from the ancient Osirian religion of Egypt: It is the Transcendent, or Bornless/Nameless, Father and the Holy (Mother) Spirit (emanation of the Father) who give birth to the Eternal Christ, which in turn splits again into the Son (spirit) and Daughter (soul/psyche) to create what is known in Qabala and Gnosticism as the Holy Tetrad.

I will add to this a bit of esoteric contemplation:

As much as we are all a separate individual psyche, we are also, in essence, truly inseparable from the source of the One-consciousness-being, so too is this so with the Holy Trinity and Holy Tetrad.

This then leads to the Mystery of the Bridal Chamber where the Daughter (soul/psyche) is married to the Son (spirit) to create the Christos (perfect offspring of the Human One or Adam) who brings forth the Sethian generation. This is a spiritual generation that is ever-coming in humanity and connotes the Second coming of Christ, hence the first Christ came as the "son of man" or Adam (this is why 'The Great Seth' is a gnostic title of the Christos) and the second Christ will be called the son of Seth, which implies a kind of alien intelligence present in humankind.

This is alluding to the ultimate evolution of consciousness where one day we shall be looked upon as very primitive for having to communicate the way we do and always having to speak to be heard (this does not mean necessarily our voices will be no longer, just that we wont have to use them as much). Our knowledge and/or experience of clairvoyance and other such psychic phenomena is only the tip of the iceberg for the evolution of consciousness. Anything that inhibits this evolution in humanity would be considered anti-Christos, or to put it plainly, anti-evolution and anti-enlightenment of humanity. The involution (anti-Christ) and evolution (Christ) of consciousness on a collective human level is constantly happening according to the teachings of Qabala.

Question for debate: What is the correct formula of the Trinity?

[Mark75]

Is this concept of Godhead taught in the Bible? What does it mean that the three persons of God have one essence? I, my wife and my son are three persons who make up one family. We share some of the same genetic material, we belong to the same species, but I would not venture to say that we have a singular essence. But I'm not sure, because I don't quite know what this essence is. Can you point to any examples other than deity, where distinct beings have the same essence? That might help to clarify the meaning.

These are excellent questions, and understandably confusing ones, too. I'll do my best to clarify. Yes, it is taught in the Bible, although not all in one place. The creating of the word "essence" is used because of the fact that the three members of the Godhead are interchangeable by name, i.e. they are all God. This is not to say that they just all share that name, but that they literally are all made of the very Divine and unique "material" which makes God God. So the teaching is there, however, it is systematized for our understanding since it is not all located in one area.

Since the God of the Bible is a unique and absolute Being, who says, "There is none like Me," and "Who is like Me in all the earth?", etc., the only example that I can offer will have to be hypothetical examples. The word "essence" is used to indicate that which makes God who He is and is unique to God. Some call it a "life-force" for lack of a better word, meaning the substance that makes up life or existence. Using that word, if you, your wife, and child all shared the same life-force that makes you you, and all of you were co-equal with one another, then you would have an example of a trinity. The issue is that there is no example of this relationship among man or anything else known in creation, which one reason God is unique.

This is, of course, the Christian perspective. A Jewish theologian, believing that the New Testament is not inspired, would have no cause to believe that there is any reference to multiple persons in God, would he? I think that many Christians think of Yahweh as the God of the Old Testament, God the Father. You would be teaching that this is a misunderstanding. Jesus is Yahweh.

You're correct on that. The God of Judaism and Allah of Islam are not Triune in nature. Again, this is one aspect of the Christian God that is unique from other religions. Also, the teaching that Jesus is the LORD or Yahweh of the OT, is in fact misunderstood by many Christians (along with many other doctrines). However there are ample quotes between the NT and the OT which demonstrate Jesus in the NT doing that which Yahweh of the OT said He would do.

Is the Father not spirit? Is the Father not holy? Then how is it that there is a distinct entity called the Holy Spirit that is not the Father? Didn't Jesus say that wherever two or three gather in his name, there will he be also? Why then does he need to send a third person?

Yes, both the Father and Son are spirit and both are holy; since all three are of the same essence, then to speak of one member of the Godhead is to implicitly refer to all members of the Godhead. The reason that the word "Spirit" is used in His name rather than giving him a name related to "Father" or "Son" is because He is the animating and life-giving person of the Godhead. And both these words in the Hebrew (ruach) and Greek (pneuma) is the word which means "spirit" because they saw these functions as functions of one's spirit (i.e. to give life and breath, hence making one alive).

And now, as you can see, when Paul said that "the fullness of the Godhead dwelt bodily in Him," it takes on a whole new meaning with this understanding of the nature of the Godhead (i.e. that it is Triune). I hope I have done something to clarify some of this. I know it is a thick doctrine to get into. And, of course, we'll take it farther if you like.

[InTheFlesh]

Before beginning my answer, let me first state that as a Christian minister, professor, and follower, my sole source for information is Scripture alone. Also, I am going to assume that the Trinity being refer to is the Biblical Christian Trinity.

In context those are good assumptions. Yes, this debate is about the Christian concept of Trinity.

Many Christians and students of Christianity are quite confused about this particular teaching. I have heard and read many different and sometimes contradictory points of view. My question boils down to this: If there is one God composed of three persons, is it that God is a committee of three distinct entities or is it that God is one entity with three avatars?

Bingo!

[McCulloch]

If there is one God composed of three persons, is it that God is a committee of three distinct entities or is it that God is one entity with three avatars?

Bingo!

[sarcasm]Thank you for your well reasoned and thoughtful response. It has helped me to understand this confusing topic. I especially appreciate how you have carefully supported your position by citing various passages from the Christian Bible and how you supported your position with reason and logic, countering the claims made by our new friend mcarma. [/sarcasm]

[McCulloch]

These are excellent questions, and understandably confusing ones, too. I'll do my best to clarify. Yes, it is taught in the Bible, although not all in one place. The creating of the word "essence" is used because of the fact that the three members of the Godhead are interchangeable by name, i.e. they are all God. This is not to say that they just all share that name, but that they literally are all made of the very Divine and unique "material" which makes God God. So the teaching is there, however, it is systematized for our understanding since it is not all located in one area.

Since the God of the Bible is a unique and absolute Being, who says, "There is none like Me," and "Who is like Me in all the earth?", etc., the only example that I can offer will have to be hypothetical examples. The word "essence" is used to indicate that which makes God who He is and is unique to God. Some call it a "life-force" for lack of a better word, meaning the substance that makes up life or existence. Using that word, if you, your wife, and child all shared the same life-force that makes you you, and all of you were co-equal with one another, then you would have an example of a trinity. The issue is that there is no example of this relationship among man or anything else known in creation, which one reason God is unique.

So when God says, "there is none like me", is it one of the three persons in the Godhead speaking, is God making a grammatical error and should be saying "there are none like us", or is it that the collective committee is speaking as a single unit as if it is a person? When you refer to God with a singular personal pronoun, is that correct grammar? The correct grammar to refer to a committee of three persons as a single entity is to use an impersonal pronoun.

• The three members of the committee - they
• Each member of the committee - he or she
• The committee as a unit - it.

Is the Father not spirit? Is the Father not holy? Then how is it that there is a distinct entity called the Holy Spirit that is not the Father? Didn't Jesus say that wherever two or three gather in his name, there will he be also? Why then does he need to send a third person?

Yes, both the Father and Son are spirit and both are holy; since all three are of the same essence, then to speak of one member of the Godhead is to implicitly refer to all members of the Godhead. The reason that the word "Spirit" is used in His name rather than giving him a name related to "Father" or "Son" is because He is the animating and life-giving person of the Godhead. And both these words in the Hebrew (ruach) and Greek (pneuma) is the word which means "spirit" because they saw these functions as functions of one's spirit (i.e. to give life and breath, hence making one alive).

And now, as you can see, when Paul said that "the fullness of the Godhead dwelt bodily in Him," it takes on a whole new meaning with this understanding of the nature of the Godhead (i.e. that it is Triune). I hope I have done something to clarify some of this. I know it is a thick doctrine to get into. And, of course, we'll take it farther if you like.

I got stuck on the claim that to speak of one member of the Godhead is to implicitly refer to all members. Are they three distinct persons or are they one person with three aspects. If they are three distinct persons then it seems incorrect to say that referring to one refers to all. Didn't Jesus say that his Father would do this or that? If Godhead is a unified essence would it have been more correct for him to claim that We (the members of the Godhead collectively) would do this or that?

[InTheFlesh]

If there is one God composed of three persons, is it that God is a committee of three distinct entities or is it that God is one entity with three avatars?

Bingo!

[sarcasm]Thank you for your well reasoned and thoughtful response. It has helped me to understand this confusing topic. I especially appreciate how you have carefully supported your position by citing various passages from the Christian Bible. [/sarcasm]

Since there are TONS of scripture
that say that three are ONE
why don't you provide
scripture from the Christian bible
that says that God is three people?
Does that even make sense?
God is three people?
If they are 3
why isn't it Gods?
Is he not addressed as a singular God?
What is so difficult about believing in a Triune God?
Believe it or not, I missed the sarcasm in your comment.

Protons and Neutrons
make up the nucleus
but there is also Electrons
surrounding them!
Science reveals God!

[Mark75]

So when God says, "there is none like me", is it one of the three persons in the Godhead speaking, is God making a grammatical error and should be saying "there are none like us", or is it that the collective committee is speaking as a single unit as if it is a person? When you refer to God with a singular personal pronoun, is that correct grammar? The correct grammar to refer to a committee of three persons as a single entity is to use an impersonal pronoun.
The three members of the committee - they
Each member of the committee - he or she
The committee as a unit - it.

It will probably help me to better answer this issue by explaining briefly an aspect of Hebrew grammar as it is used in reference to God in the OT Scriptures. You may or may not be aware of this, so if you are, I apologize and you can just skip past it:

In the Hebrew language, as well as in many of the ancient languages, there exists not just singular and plural as in English and many other modern languages; nouns are described regarding number as either singular(only 1), dual (things that come in pairs, e.g. 2 hands, 2 feet, etc.), and plural (3 or more). As you probably know, the word used in Hebrew for God is the word "Elohim." This is the plural of the word "El", which is usually only referring to a non-Christian deity. The interesting fact to note is that in the Hebrew Scriptures, the word for God is always referred to in the plural (Elohim), but it always takes a singular verb.

This leading up to something I probably should have done a better job at in the last post of explaining, but the three Persons of the Godhead are not just different expressions or representations of the same essence, but all three members are not only full and complete Persons, but they all three exist and have always existed and will always exist at the same time. Statements by or about God in the OT such as the one I mentioned in the last post such as Psalm 71:19 - "...You who have done great things; O God, who is like You?" or Psalm 89:8 - "O Lord God of hosts, who is like You, O mighty Lord?..." as well as several others are referring to the entire Godhead as a single unit, hence the singular pronouns and verbs. However, as stated earlier, all three members co-exist at the same time as completely distinct Persons, each with all the attributes of full personhood.

To clarify the second question raised, Jesus actually said in John 10:10, "I and the Father are One." The Holy Spirit receives the same identification in the book of Acts, as well. Therefore, what I am trying to show is that to speak of one member of the Godhead is to speak of all the members of the Godhead. For example, to speak of the Son (Jesus) is also speaking of the Father. And yes, there are times when a particular member of the Godhead performs a particular action; however, ultimately, that action would be attributed to all members of the Godhead, even though all three members are able to act independent of each other. Because they are all of one essence, there is still a unity that exists among them.


Now to address the questions raised by InTheFlesh:

Since there are TONS of scripture
that say that three are ONE
why don't you provide
scripture from the Christian bible
that says that God is three people?
Does that even make sense?
God is three people?
If they are 3
why isn't it Gods?
Is he not addressed as a singular God?
What is so difficult about believing in a Triune God?
Believe it or not, I missed the sarcasm in your comment.

Yes, this doctrine is actually taught in the Scriptures, otherwise I wouldn't teach it. However, as with most doctrines in Scripture, it is not comprised of one single verse in one single location. A person has to actually study the Scriptures to learn doctrines such as this one which are contain in Scripture. If a person has not studied the Scriptures, then I can understand why one would not find such a complex doctrine as this one so easily.

And yes, I realize as much as anyone how this doctrine clashes with man's logic; but you have to also take into account that God is not bound by anything including our laws, otherwise He wouldn't really be God. Actually He created these very laws for our benefit, that we might live in an orderly society, not for His benefit. As you will discover if you study the Scriptures, there are many aspects of God that are difficult, if not near impossible, to wrap our finite minds around.

I hope this has at least cleared up a bit more of the doctrine. But if not, we'll keep going... I am truly enjoying the dialogue we're having.

[McCulloch]

In the Hebrew language, as well as in many of the ancient languages, there exists not just singular and plural as in English and many other modern languages; nouns are described regarding number as either singular(only 1), dual (things that come in pairs, e.g. 2 hands, 2 feet, etc.), and plural (3 or more). As you probably know, the word used in Hebrew for God is the word "Elohim." This is the plural of the word "El", which is usually only referring to a non-Christian deity. The interesting fact to note is that in the Hebrew Scriptures, the word for God is always referred to in the plural (Elohim), but it always takes a singular verb.

This is interesting. I always find human languages and their grammars fascinating.

This leading up to something I probably should have done a better job at in the last post of explaining, but the three Persons of the Godhead are not just different expressions or representations of the same essence, but all three members are not only full and complete Persons, but they all three exist and have always existed and will always exist at the same time. Statements by or about God in the OT such as the one I mentioned in the last post such as Psalm 71:19 - "...You who have done great things; O God, who is like You?" or Psalm 89:8 - "O Lord God of hosts, who is like You, O mighty Lord?..." as well as several others are referring to the entire Godhead as a single unit, hence the singular pronouns and verbs. However, as stated earlier, all three members co-exist at the same time as completely distinct Persons, each with all the attributes of full personhood.

My question is not about the number of the pronouns but the use of the personal pronoun when referring to a group of three persons. If it is correct to refer to God as he then God must be a single person. If God is a committee of three persons, then the correct English pronoun would be it rather than he.

Mary, Fred and Eduard are persons on the Board of Directors. They meet every Friday. The Board makes decisions regarding the organization. It receives communications from stakeholders regularly.

The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are persons of the Godhead. They are concerned with the salvation of humans. God makes decisions regarding human worship. [He or It] receives communications in the form of prayer.

If you notice the parallel, you will agree that the correct answer is that God should be referred to as it in English unless God is one single person.

To clarify the second question raised, Jesus actually said in John 10:10, "I and the Father are One." The Holy Spirit receives the same identification in the book of Acts, as well. Therefore, what I am trying to show is that to speak of one member of the Godhead is to speak of all the members of the Godhead. For example, to speak of the Son (Jesus) is also speaking of the Father. And yes, there are times when a particular member of the Godhead performs a particular action; however, ultimately, that action would be attributed to all members of the Godhead, even though all three members are able to act independent of each other. Because they are all of one essence, there is still a unity that exists among them.

OK, you lost me. Either the distinct persons of the Godhead can and do act as individuals or they act as a single person. Jesus statement that, "I and the Father are one" is a recognition that there are two entities (I and the Father) and that in some way, they are united as one. Jesus is quoted as saying (in John 17:22) "The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one." It would appear that Jesus is claiming that his followers can have the same kind of oneness with the Father as he has. Yet, I don't think that Christianity promises divinity to its followers, does it?

I have been thinking about the use of the word essence in relation to this topic. I do realize that this word is not found in any of the scripture, but is simply an attempt by theologians to explain this concept. But, essence is related to the word essentially. For example, if I were to lose my arm, I would still be essentially the same person. But, if I were to lose my mind, I would not. If you were to clone me, the clone would not be essentially the same person (remember identical twins are clones of each other). So, when you say that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are the same essence, it seems to me that you are back at there being one God, with one person, one identity, and three avatars or faces. You seem to reinforce this idea by referring to God with the singular personal pronoun he rather than the impersonal pronoun it.

And yes, I realize as much as anyone how this doctrine clashes with man's logic; but you have to also take into account that God is not bound by anything including our laws, otherwise He wouldn't really be God.

I don't know about a distinction between human logic and divine logic. Do you really believe that God is not bound by logic? For example, one logical principle is the principle of non-contradiction. Symbolically represented as ¬( P ⋀ ¬ P ). Is God exempt from this logical principle? If you believe so, then you cannot speak logically or reasonably about God.

[InTheFlesh]

mcarma wrote:

You're correct on that. The God of Judaism and Allah of Islam are not Triune in nature. Again, this is one aspect of the Christian God that is unique from other religions. Also, the teaching that Jesus is the LORD or Yahweh of the OT, is in fact misunderstood by many Christians (along with many other doctrines). However there are ample quotes between the NT and the OT which demonstrate Jesus in the NT doing that which Yahweh of the OT said He would do.

The God of Moses is ONE!
The Christian God is ONE!
It is the SAME God!
There is only ONE GOD!
The writings of Moses
are the words of Jesus!

[Goat]

So when God says, "there is none like me", is it one of the three persons in the Godhead speaking, is God making a grammatical error and should be saying "there are none like us", or is it that the collective committee is speaking as a single unit as if it is a person? When you refer to God with a singular personal pronoun, is that correct grammar? The correct grammar to refer to a committee of three persons as a single entity is to use an impersonal pronoun.
The three members of the committee - they
Each member of the committee - he or she
The committee as a unit - it.

It will probably help me to better answer this issue by explaining briefly an aspect of Hebrew grammar as it is used in reference to God in the OT Scriptures. You may or may not be aware of this, so if you are, I apologize and you can just skip past it:

In the Hebrew language, as well as in many of the ancient languages, there exists not just singular and plural as in English and many other modern languages; nouns are described regarding number as either singular(only 1), dual (things that come in pairs, e.g. 2 hands, 2 feet, etc.), and plural (3 or more). As you probably know, the word used in Hebrew for God is the word "Elohim." This is the plural of the word "El", which is usually only referring to a non-Christian deity. The interesting fact to note is that in the Hebrew Scriptures, the word for God is always referred to in the plural (Elohim), but it always takes a singular verb.

This leading up to something I probably should have done a better job at in the last post of explaining, but the three Persons of the Godhead are not just different expressions or representations of the same essence, but all three members are not only full and complete Persons, but they all three exist and have always existed and will always exist at the same time. Statements by or about God in the OT such as the one I mentioned in the last post such as Psalm 71:19 - "...You who have done great things; O God, who is like You?" or Psalm 89:8 - "O Lord God of hosts, who is like You, O mighty Lord?..." as well as several others are referring to the entire Godhead as a single unit, hence the singular pronouns and verbs. However, as stated earlier, all three members co-exist at the same time as completely distinct Persons, each with all the attributes of full personhood.

To clarify the second question raised, Jesus actually said in John 10:10, "I and the Father are One." The Holy Spirit receives the same identification in the book of Acts, as well. Therefore, what I am trying to show is that to speak of one member of the Godhead is to speak of all the members of the Godhead. For example, to speak of the Son (Jesus) is also speaking of the Father. And yes, there are times when a particular member of the Godhead performs a particular action; however, ultimately, that action would be attributed to all members of the Godhead, even though all three members are able to act independent of each other. Because they are all of one essence, there is still a unity that exists among them.


Now to address the questions raised by InTheFlesh:

Since there are TONS of scripture
that say that three are ONE
why don't you provide
scripture from the Christian bible
that says that God is three people?
Does that even make sense?
God is three people?
If they are 3
why isn't it Gods?
Is he not addressed as a singular God?
What is so difficult about believing in a Triune God?
Believe it or not, I missed the sarcasm in your comment.

Yes, this doctrine is actually taught in the Scriptures, otherwise I wouldn't teach it. However, as with most doctrines in Scripture, it is not comprised of one single verse in one single location. A person has to actually study the Scriptures to learn doctrines such as this one which are contain in Scripture. If a person has not studied the Scriptures, then I can understand why one would not find such a complex doctrine as this one so easily.

And yes, I realize as much as anyone how this doctrine clashes with man's logic; but you have to also take into account that God is not bound by anything including our laws, otherwise He wouldn't really be God. Actually He created these very laws for our benefit, that we might live in an orderly society, not for His benefit. As you will discover if you study the Scriptures, there are many aspects of God that are difficult, if not near impossible, to wrap our finite minds around.

I hope this has at least cleared up a bit more of the doctrine. But if not, we'll keep going... I am truly enjoying the dialogue we're having.

Now, in John , when he said 'my father and I are one', that does not necessarily mean 'one part of three'. There are numerous other interpretations, particularly if you look up how the term 'logos' was being used in the time frame that John was being written. John is one of those books that have been changed a number of times to refit it to other theological viewpoints too.

Being that all the references are scattered, and vague, and it seems like you are looking at a misuse of the Hebrew in your example, what kind of insurance do you have that you are not reading INTO the text rather than reading FROM the text?

It seems to me that even three 'personhood' is a contradiction for
"Here of Israel, the lord our god, the lord is ONE'

[Mark75]

Now, in John , when he said 'my father and I are one', that does not necessarily mean 'one part of three'. There are numerous other interpretations, particularly if you look up how the term 'logos' was being used in the time frame that John was being written. John is one of those books that have been changed a number of times to refit it to other theological viewpoints too.

Being that all the references are scattered, and vague, and it seems like you are looking at a misuse of the Hebrew in your example, what kind of insurance do you have that you are not reading INTO the text rather than reading FROM the text?

It seems to me that even three 'personhood' is a contradiction for
"Here of Israel, the lord our god, the lord is ONE'

First of all, I need to clear up a few things. John's gospel, as well as the rest of the NT is written in Greek, not Hebrew, which carries a completely different set of grammar rules and syntax. Second, I am curious to know what you are referring to when you say that John has been changed a number of times. I've been looking at these manuscripts for a while, and am unaware of any such changes.