How NOT to Explain the Trinity — David Bercot

The views expressed by our guests are solely their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Anabaptist Perspectives or Wellspring Mennonite Church.

[hitmanultra]

Here is an attempt from the Catholic side:

The eternal Father has an eternal idea, the Word, which is so real that it is its own separate person (the Son). The love between the Father and the Son is so real, that it is also its own separate person (the Holy Spirit).

[idontknowwhatimdoing]

The problem with this explanation is that its a misunderstanding of “begotten” which is not, necessarily, a good translation.
The Greek “monogenes” was used to describe singularly unique beings, not necessarily created beings
So instead of “begotten”, which insinuates that Jesus was “created” or “came forth”, the Greek can be used as “singularly unique” son

Remember, its the same author, John, who says that the Word was with God and was God (John 1:1) and through Him all things were created (John 1:3).
And the Word, which is the eternal God, put on flesh (John 1:14)
God, put on flesh, and was born as man, which makes him the Son.
There is no God without the Son and Spirit, they are all three unique persons of the eternal God.

The fact is that the Trinity is hard to explain because its a name we put on an observation.
Like what is “gravity”. Its what keeps us from floating away from the Earth. But thats not a definition its another observation. Its the force that emanates from a celestial mass that draws smaller masses to it. Still not good, what is force, how is it created, what are its boundaries… its hard to describe observations by naming them, they’re named to assist in referencing them without having an hour long description each time they are referenced.

The Trinity is a simplified descriptor used to refer to the characteristic way that the singularly unique, non-created being observed in the Christian narrative exists. and that being is simultaneously singular and triune, one being incorporating 3 unique persons, none of them can be taken away while another remains because all of them exist eternally together

[grasonicus]

If the Trinity were true, clearly the father-son relationship used to illustrate the relationship between Jesus and the Father is wrong. I saw this long ago. Yes, it would be a brother-brother-brother relationship. Why then does the Bible repeatedly use this father-son relationship? Why did Jesus call God his Father? Why did the voice at Jesus's baptism say, this is my beloved son? Why did Peter say to Jesus: _“You are the Messiah, the _*_Son of the living God.”_*
There is *zero Biblical evidence for a brother-brother relationship* and overwhelming evidence for a father-son relationship. Of course, the father-son relationship is not like for Earthly fathers and sons, but it's the closest we'll understand.
The Trinity dogma cannot exist if 1god + 1god + 1god = 1god is false, which it is. Note the entity type remains constant throughout the equation. Not like 1 shell + 1 yolk + 1 egg white = 1 egg where there are four entity types. It's so dimwitted to even try to use this as an explanation.
Jesus said the Father is the only true god. No conditions. Paul said, _for us, there is one god, the Father..._
Both the Trinity dogma and Sunday holiness are Catholic remnants in Protestantism.

[trebmaster]

What would be an issue with saying it's like having an original and 2 clones or copies, but they always existed at the same time?

[bradbrown]

Jesus and Spirit proceeds from the Father co equal co eternal. Same substance in 3 persons. Is it closer to an idea of a one cell organism going through meiosis? If not which heresy did I stumble upon? 🙂

[brianpace]

I have been enjoying David for a while. But not so much with this video. Clearly, they are not like brothers. David, just leave it alone. You don't get it yet.

[AlmaTlust]

Not a lot more helpful than the concepts he's dismissing (and rightly so).
A good book about this: "Delighting in the Trinity" by Michael Reeves.