The Baha'i Source some call God(s) and why I believe in God.

[tabibito]

Biblically - the doctrine of the trinity is inescapable.

[robrecht]

Disagree by the facts of history. At the time Rome was a theocracy, and Constantine convened and presided over the Council.

Read Canon 6 of the Council of Nicea if you want to understand the conciliar fathers' view of the authority of Rome at that time.

Not all Christians understand the Trinity as Monotheism.

That is very much related to the the point I was trying to get you to recognize when encouraging you to study the variety of trinitarian views, especially between East and West, when looking at the origin of the doctrine of the Trinity. Rome's view is generally understood to emphasize the oneness of God more than some in the East. Nonetheless, the Nicean Creed begins with a strong affirmation of monotheism.

The Trinity defines God as three consubstantial distinct persons of the same substance, and yes in this concept, Jesus Christ is considered truly God. This concept would not be true in pure Monotheism.

I am asking you about your understanding of the Trinity as a metaphysical expression of the the nature of God. In this view of the Trinity, what is it a Trinity of, in other words, three what?

[shunyadragon]

Biblically - the doctrine of the trinity is inescapable.

I escaped.

[shunyadragon]

That is very much related to the the point I was trying to get you to recognize when encouraging you to study the variety of trinitarian views, especially between East and West, when looking at the origin of the doctrine of the Trinity. Rome's view is generally understood to emphasize the oneness of God more than some in the East. Nonetheless, the Nicean Creed begins with a strong affirmation of monotheism.

For more than 40 years I have studied the variety of Trinitarian views, and looked into the origins of the Doctrine of the Trinity. Regardless of statements of strong affirmation of monotheism, nor the emphasis on the emphasis of the oneness of God negates the specific definition of the Trinity in Christian Doctrine, which defines a type of polytheism.

Repeated on different subjects, you have asserted; if I study more than for some reason I will change my view. It is possible that in the future my views may in some way change, because I am constantly reading and studying as I have since I was about 14. Over time my views do change and I have been very much open to change in many ways. At present I do not anticipate any change on this issue, because I have read most of the possible references, and the description of the Trinity, nor the traditional justification for the Trinity has not changed.

I am asking you about your understanding of the Trinity as a metaphysical expression of the the nature of God. In this view of the Trinity, what is it a Trinity of, in other words, three what?

First, the metaphysical expression does not include the physical, as in the belief that Jesus Christ is physically the "begotten" God and Resurrected physically, and remains a distinct "person" seated at the right hand of God.

Second, it does not assume any division nor separate identity, nor "persons" in the nature of God.

Third, this is an apophatic view of pure monotheism, and God in essence and nature cannot be defined in the Doctrine as the Trinity.

Fourth, the 'metaphysical expression' considers the Trinity as symbolic and descriptive of the nature God's relationship with Creation and humanity that is reflected in all the religions and scriptures of the history of Revelation from God. The expressions in this case are not three distinct "persons" in one God.

Three what?

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity#Jesus_as_God

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity (from Latin trinitas "triad", from trinus "threefold")[1] defines God as three consubstantial persons,[2] expressions, or hypostases:[3] the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature".[4] In this context, a "nature" is what one is, while a "person" is who one is.

© Copyright Original Source

[robrecht]

For more than 40 years I have studied the variety of Trinitarian views, and looked into the origins of the Doctrine of the Trinity. Regardless of statements of strong affirmation of monotheism, nor the emphasis on the emphasis of the oneness of God negates the specific definition of the Trinity in Christian Doctrine, which defines a type of polytheism.

In your opinion, but not in the opinion of those who actually hold these beliefs. You can define your own beliefs, but are apparently not very good at defining the beliefs of others.

Repeated on different subjects, you have asserted; if I study more than for some reason I will change my view. It is possible that in the future my views may in some way change, because I am constantly reading and studying as I have since I was about 14. Over time my views do change and I have been very much open to change in many ways. At present I do not anticipate any change on this issue, because I have read most of the possible references, and the description of the Trinity, nor the traditional justification for the Trinity has not changed.

If you read Westermann, and are intellectually honest, you will realize that I did not misrepresent him. If you are intellectually responsible you will concede the point. But your record is poor in this regard; you will not even point to any place where I supposedly misrepresented his views. Instead you just make a blanket accusation without substantiation of any kind. When you assert that I have concocted my own idiosyncratic definition of theological reflection, and I have shown you repeatedly that this is not true, an intellectually responsible person would gladly and honestly concede the point. You seldom do this, which is why I do not necessarily believe that you will change your views. It is up to you if you want to be an intellectually honest and trusted partner in dialogue. Perhaps the best I can hope for is that some readers will recognize when you are unfairly mischaracterizing the beliefs of others. But that would be unfortunate. I always hope for partners in dialogue. It's up to you.

First, the metaphysical expression does not include the physical, as in the belief that Jesus Christ is physically the "begotten" God and Resurrected physically, and remains a distinct "person" seated at the right hand of God.

Second, it does not assume any division nor separate identity, nor "persons" in the nature of God.

Third, this is an apophatic view of pure monotheism, and God in essence and nature cannot be defined in the Doctrine as the Trinity.

Fourth, the 'metaphysical expression' considers the Trinity as symbolic and descriptive of the nature God's relationship with Creation and humanity that is reflected in all the religions and scriptures of the history of Revelation from God. The expressions in this case are not three distinct "persons" in one God.

Three what?

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity#Jesus_as_God

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity (from Latin trinitas "triad", from trinus "threefold")[1] defines God as three consubstantial persons,[2] expressions, or hypostases:[3] the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature".[4] In this context, a "nature" is what one is, while a "person" is who one is.

© Copyright Original Source

You are still avoiding my question. I am not asking you to define Christian trinitarian doctrine or theology or how it differs from what is not in the metaphysical view of the Trinity. I am rather simply asking you to explain your understanding of the metaphysical trinitarian view, specifically, why you refer to it as a Trinity, ie, from the Latin trinitas "triad", trinus "threefold"). In what way do you understand this metaphysical view of the Trinity to be a triad or threefold? Three what? It is OK for you to say you do not know if that's the case, but it is silly for you to keep avoiding the question.

[One Bad Pig]

For more than 40 years I have studied the variety of Trinitarian views, and looked into the origins of the Doctrine of the Trinity.

I feel sad for you. You spent all that time studying the Trinity, and still do not grasp it, nor understand its history. The Council of Nicaea is a particularly poor point to pick for the establishment of the doctrine; the deity of the Holy Spirit was not even addressed at it.

[tabibito]

The trinity doesn't seem so hard to understand:
the Logos is God, but is neither the Holy Spirit nor the Father. - My soul is me, but is neither my body nor my spirit.
the Father is God, but is neither the Logos nor the Holy Spirit. - My spirit is me ~
The Holy Spirit is God, but is neither the Logos nor the Father. - My body is me ~
The Father, the Logos, and the Holy Spirit in combination are God. - My body, soul, and spirit in combination are me.

[shunyadragon]

The trinity doesn't seem so hard to understand:
the Logos is God, but is neither the Holy Spirit nor the Father. - My soul is me, but is neither my body nor my spirit.
the Father is God, but is neither the Logos nor the Holy Spirit. - My spirit is me ~
The Holy Spirit is God, but is neither the Logos nor the Father. - My body is me ~
The Father, the Logos, and the Holy Spirit in combination are God. - My body, soul, and spirit in combination are me.

The Trinity does not refer to you.

[shunyadragon]

You are still avoiding my question. I am not asking you to define Christian trinitarian doctrine or theology or how it differs from what is not in the metaphysical view of the Trinity. I am rather simply asking you to explain your understanding of the metaphysical trinitarian view, specifically, why you refer to it as a Trinity, ie, from the Latin trinitas "triad", trinus "threefold"). In what way do you understand this metaphysical view of the Trinity to be a triad or threefold? Three what? It is OK for you to say you do not know if that's the case, but it is silly for you to keep avoiding the question.

. . . and I will keep answering.

First, the metaphysical expression does not include the physical, as in the belief that Jesus Christ is physically the "begotten" God and Resurrected physically, and remains a distinct "person" seated at the right hand of God.

Second, it does not assume any division nor separate identity, nor "persons" in the nature of God.

Third, this is an apophatic view of pure monotheism, and God in essence and nature cannot be defined in the Doctrine as the Trinity.

Fourth, the 'metaphysical expression' considers the Trinity as symbolic and descriptive of the nature God's relationship with Creation and humanity that is reflected in all the religions and scriptures of the history of Revelation from God. The expressions in this case are not three distinct "persons" in one God.

Three what?

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity#Jesus_as_God

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity (from Latin trinitas "triad", from trinus "threefold")[1] defines God as three consubstantial persons,[2] expressions, or hypostases:[3] the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature".[4] In this context, a "nature" is what one is, while a "person" is who one is.

© Copyright Original Source

[robrecht]

. . . and I will keep answering.

First, the metaphysical expression does not include the physical, as in the belief that Jesus Christ is physically the "begotten" God and Resurrected physically, and remains a distinct "person" seated at the right hand of God.

Second, it does not assume any division nor separate identity, nor "persons" in the nature of God.

Third, this is an apophatic view of pure monotheism, and God in essence and nature cannot be defined in the Doctrine as the Trinity.

Fourth, the 'metaphysical expression' considers the Trinity as symbolic and descriptive of the nature God's relationship with Creation and humanity that is reflected in all the religions and scriptures of the history of Revelation from God. The expressions in this case are not three distinct "persons" in one God.

Three what?

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity#Jesus_as_God

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity (from Latin trinitas "triad", from trinus "threefold")[1] defines God as three consubstantial persons,[2] expressions, or hypostases:[3] the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature".[4] In this context, a "nature" is what one is, while a "person" is who one is.

© Copyright Original Source

Again, nonresponsive. If you can't answer the question it does not help to keep repeating yourself. I know what the metaphysical view is NOT. I'm asking you in what sense the metaphysical view is a trinity, ie, three of what???

[shunyadragon]

Again, nonresponsive. If you can't answer the question it does not help to keep repeating yourself. I know what the metaphysical view is NOT. I'm asking you in what sense the metaphysical view is a trinity, ie, three of what???

In simplicity as it is in all religions: God, the Messiah, the Revelation (The relationship between humanity and God).

[robrecht]

In simplicity as it is in all religions: God, the Messiah, the Revelation.

Do you consider the Messiah and Revelation to be God? If not, how is this Trinity a metaphysical expression of the nature of God? Why do you refer to that as metaphysical? Are not your Messiahs and Revelation manifested within history?

[Adrift]

I feel sad for you. You spent all that time studying the Trinity, and still do not grasp it, nor understand its history. The Council of Nicaea is a particularly poor point to pick for the establishment of the doctrine; the deity of the Holy Spirit was not even addressed at it.

I don't believe for a second that he actually spent that much time studying the Trinity. Maybe read a couple books that were over his head, and a few pamphlets from the local Baha'i meeting place, but he shows absolutely no sign of even beginning to understand the doctrine of the Trinity outside of quickly googled soundbites.

[shunyadragon]

Do you consider the Messiah and Revelation to be God?

No, they are manifestations of God.

If not, how is this Trinity a metaphysical expression of the nature of God?

It reflects the spiritual attributes of God. The ultimate nature of God is unknown.

Why do you refer to that as metaphysical?

The Revelation through the Messiah reveals and reflects the attributes of God.

Source: http://www.yourdictionary.com/metaphysical

2.Immaterial, supersensual, not physical (more properly, "beyond" that which is physical).

© Copyright Original Source

Are not your Messiahs and Revelation manifested within history?

Yes, in an evolving cyclic progressive process that manifests the spiritual attributes of God. Revelation is part of the natural process of Creation. Revelation also occurs through the mind of humans.

I consider the Trinity and attempt of the church fathers to explain the relationship between God, humanity and Creation, which cannot be explained by a doctrine of human construction.

One side note: One looking over posts and threads, and my notes your use of 'theological reflection as used in your sources is ok, but this use may be universal in some way or another in all religions. Nonetheless I would not use it this way to describe this process. I consider 'theological reflection' a human effort to understand the Divine, and does not have any certainty in establishing the truth concerning the nature of God, nor Doctrine.

How do you consider 'theological reflection' to result in the truth of a Doctrine in this case, than as it is used in any other religion or determination of doctrine including those who consider the Trinity as false?

[shunyadragon]

I feel sad for you. You spent all that time studying the Trinity, and still do not grasp it, nor understand its history. The Council of Nicaea is a particularly poor point to pick for the establishment of the doctrine; the deity of the Holy Spirit was not even addressed at it.

OK, feel sad. It is a fact that establishment of the doctrine of the Trinity occurred at the Council of Nicaea.