 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > General Chat > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/19/2010 11:39 AM (GMT -6) |   | | I'm going to mention the traits that I feel have to exist in the members of the Holy Trinity.
God the Father, the Fount of Divinity: Pleasure in bestowing oneself to an "other"
God the Son: Pleasure in receiving from an "other" (corresponding reality to the Father's desire to bestow himself to an "other", Pleasure in bestowing oneself to an "other" (inherited from the Father).
God the Holy Spirit: The Power of pleasurable experience in self-other knowledge and self-other communication.
I'm not trying to define the Trinity here. What I'm saying is this: Just looking at manner in which we usually describe the One Triune God in Three Divine Persons, it seems that it would kinda have to be this way. The Father is the fount of Divinity, the ultimate ground for it all. Primordial actuality. At the same time, the Holy Spirit is the Father's dispositional ability for knowing and communicating himself, thus creating a Perfect Image of himself in the Son. Again, no one knows the thoughts of God but the Spirit of God, right? That's Scripture. So, God the Son, having the same characteristics as the Father (as Image does Original), would have the innate capacity for pleasure in bestowing himself on an "other"...but it should also be noted that God the Son is the corresponding reality to the Father's desire for self-knowledge and self-communication. As such, the Son is the ultimate RECEIVER of this gift of the Father's self-giving self-communication...and the Son has pleasure in this reception from his "Other", the Father. Here's what's interesting. The Son GIVES in his loving reception of the Father's being...because he is fulfilling the Father's desire for self-communication. So, everything that the Father gives to the Son, the Son gives back to the God the Father, who experiences the pleasure of receiving the "gift" of self-giving from the Son ...such that the Son (joyful reception of an 'other's' self-giving) is now "in" the Father. And the Holy Spirit is the personal reality that eternally "conceives" and "brings forth" the Son from the Father's Will...to be "presented" back to the Father as his Image, bringing the Father's joy in familial love.
So in the Trinity you have all of the ingredients for ALL inter-personal and intra-personal relationship dynamics. Think about it. Can you even talk about self-relationship ala human consciousness WITHOUT talking about personal sharing within and without oneself? Nope. Not really. There would be no psychology and sociology WITHOUT these dynamics. All "sin" is...is a MISRELATION in these dynamics somewhere. From despairing self-centered narcissism to despairing other-centered martyr-type co-dependency.
Is this making sense?
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/19/2010 11:46:34 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
 |
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/19/2010 8:47 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
I think Jonathan Edwards got the closest. God (Father) self-perceives. And in that act no attribute of God (Father) is lacking in the perceived self (Son). So the SON is content (as it were) of the Father's self-perception, i.e., the 'image' of the Father. I can actually make some sense of that. And I see a bit of logic in it.
My stuff is pretty much saying the same thing. The Father actualizes his dispositional Power for self-knowledge and self-communication (via His Holy Spirit) to eternally "beget" his Eternal Image, God the Son. God's eternal self-relational, self-referential activity leads to God's eternal triune hypostatic existence. Makes sense to me.
************************************************
Tom:
It's fitting in the Spirit that's more difficult for me.
From what I recall, Edwards wasn't really clear on that either. But you and I have already dealt with this. From the dispositional ontology perspective, the Holy Spirit is the God the Father's dispositional Power by which the Father self-knows, self-wills, self-gives, and self-communicates. Again, no one knows the thoughts of God but the Spirit of God. The Holy Spirit is the means by which the depths of God are mined and the wisdom therein revealed...analogously to how human existence is plumbed by way of our human spirit. (1 Corinthians 2:11) The Holy Spirit is naturally "resting" in God the Son as part and parcel of the Son's divine Imagebearing of the Father. The Holy Spirit is the person involved with both the Father's individual ecstatic nature and the Trinity's sociality of perspective.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/19/2010 8:52:42 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/20/2010 8:16 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
If I HAVE to choose a priority here, I'm inclined to say the Spirit is spirated as an act of love between Father and Son, not already fully hypostatized by the Father before any consideration of the Son comes into the picture.
This goes back to filioque.
The Filioque Controversy
The controversy over the Latin word filioque is regarded by scholars as one of the chief factors contributing to the split of the western and eastern churches, which was formalized in 1054 AD. It continues to be the source of bad feeling towards Catholicism in Eastern Orthodoxy today. Although the controversy centers around just one word and a rather abstract issue regarding the Holy Spirit, it causes some theological difficulty for Eastern Christians, but perhaps more importantly, they resent the West's tampering with the ecumenical creeds, which are of great importance in Orthodoxy.
The filioque controversy centers around the relationship between the Spirit and the other two Persons in the Trinity, the Father and the Son. In Christian theology and creeds, the Son is "eternally begotten" of the Father. This means that the Son is somehow caused or generated by the Father but not created or begotten in a chronological sense, since the two are both eternal. But how to understand the relationship of the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son? In the Eastern Church, the Spirit is described as proceeding from the Father. Like "begotten," this term both recognizes the Father as the source and indicate an eternal, ongoing relationship. This was the phrase used in the original Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (381).
In the Western Church (Catholicism and Protestantism), however, the Spirit is described as proceeding from the Father and the Son. This last phrase, "and the Son," is the English equivalent of the Latin word filioque. The idea that the Spirit proceeds from the Son, which is also known as "Double Procession" is based on the following New Testament passages:
•John 16:13-15 - Jesus says the Spirit will take what is Jesus' and show it to the disciples
•Gal. 4:6 - Holy Spirit as "the Spirit of the Son"
•Rom. 8:9 - Holy Spirit as "the Spirit of Christ"
•Phil. 1:19 - Holy Spirit as "the Spirit of Jesus Christ"
•John 14:16, 15:26, 16:7 - Jesus sends the Holy Spirit
•John 20:22 - Jesus breathes on the disciples and says, "Receive the Holy Spirit"
Western theologians also find support for the filioque doctrine in the writings of St. Cyril of Alexandria, St. Jerome, St. Ambrose, and especially St. Augustine. The filoque phrase is first recorded as being added to the creed at the Third Council of Toledo (589), and by the 9th century the phrase was routinely used in the Western Church. The attractiveness of this view for Western thinkers is that it emphasizes the relational bond between the three Persons of the Trinity. They sought to preserve the Persons' distinction from one another, but also emphasizing their unity and close relationship.
However, most of the early Greek church fathers were adamant that the Spirit proceeds only from the Father, and, as seen above, the original 381 Creed reflects this belief. Eastern theologians stress that there must be only one Fount of Divinity within the Godhead, which is the Father. Thus the Son is begotten (gemnesis) of the Father and the Spirit proceeds (ekporeusis) from the Father. For Eastern Christians, the filioque amounts to believing that there are two sources of divinity within the Godhead, which causes all kinds of internal contradictions and tensions, weakens the distinction between Son and Spirit, and depersonalizes the Spirit. They point to the Western term "Spirit of Christ" as a classic example of the way the filioque doctrine blurs the line between the Second and Third Persons of the Trinity.
However, despite the considerable tension between Greek and Latin thinkers on this issue, some have sought to reconcile the two approaches. St. Augustine, while affirming the filioque, affirmed that the Holy Spirit "principally proceeds" from the Father. Other Latin writers have likewise sought to clarify that they were not teaching two sources of divinity within the Godhead, and the Council of Lyons (1274) stated that "the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, yet not as from two origins but as one origin." Nevertheless, the same Council of Lyons also condemned those who deny the filioque clause and the doctrine remains a significant point of contention between Eastern and Western Churches today. The most recent development is a statement issued by the North American Orthodox-Catholic Consultation on October 28, 2003, which concluded a four-year study on the issue and suggested steps towards unity.
Protestants generally follow the Catholic doctrine of the filioque. Anglicans, who among Protestants are most closely identified with Catholicism, have generally accepted Double Procession since the 39 Articles, but modern Anglican theologians participating in ecumenical discussions on the subject are often disposed to dropping the filioque from the Creed.
******************************************************************
Now, here's how things work with us, Tom. And it works out quite nicely, too. God the Father, dispositionally speaking, is the absolute ground-floor actuality of Divinity. The Holy Spirit, person as (S)he is, is the Spirit of God. And the "God" we are talking about here is God the Father per Nicene Creed. The Holy Spirit is "how" the God the Father knows himself. Again, this is just Scripture. It is by the ONE Holy Spirit of God that the thoughts of God are discovered and revealed. It's almost like the Holy Spirit is God the Father's "helper suitable for him" for self-knowledge for the sake of self-giving, self-expression. The Holy Spirit mediates the primordial actuality of the Father and the eternally actualizable (and actualized) possibility of the Father's Image, the Son. Now, the rest is downhill from there. As you say, Tom, God the Son has all the qualities and characteristics of the Father...he is just Eternally Begotten whereas the Father is fundamentally UNbegotten. This means that God the Son will have "His Daddy's Spirit" in Him. Which makes sense: God the Son would know himself AS the Father's Son only through the ONE Holy Spirit of God. The ONE Holy Spirit is God the Father's "helper" in empowering his ecstatic potential. AND the ONE Holy Spirit is the relational "tie that binds" in God's triune perspectival sociality.
We'd probably end up sounding more like Augustine, I guess. There is an ASSYMETRY in double procession where God the Father (inseparable from his Eternal "Helper", the Holy Spirit) is true origin of divine reality. It is by the power of the Spirit that the Father images himself in the Son...and by the same Power that the Son "conforms" us to his image, giving us HIS (the Son's) Spirit.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/20/2010 8:51:08 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/20/2010 9:02 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
See, if the Father can bring about the personal existence of another divine person (the Spirit) without any other divine person empowering him to do so, then how do we argue (as you do) that the Father can't bring about the Son without being empowered by the Spirit (as person) to do so?
Can God the Father "self-perceive" or conceive of a self-image without the Holy Spirit?
---------------------------------------
Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. 7 But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 But, as it is written,
“What no eye has seen, nor ear heard,
nor the heart of man imagined,
what God has prepared for those who love him”—
10 these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. 11 For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. 13 And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.
14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. 16 “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ. (OL's Note: Human beings have the "mind of Christ" by way of the Holy Spirit)
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/20/2010 9:06:40 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/20/2010 1:27 PM (GMT -6) | | | Who is speaking in Proverbs 8? The Wisdom of God personified as a "She" who was seen as co-eternal with God the Father...right?
Now which Divine Person would it make the most sense to attribute this to, looking at all of Proverbs 8?
************************
“The Lord possessed me at the beginning of his work,
the first of his acts of old.
Ages ago I was set up,
at the first, before the beginning of the earth.
When there were no depths I was brought forth,
when there were no springs abounding with water.
Before the mountains had been shaped,
before the hills, I was brought forth,
before he had made the earth with its fields,
or the first of the dust of the world.
When he established the heavens, I was there;
when he drew a circle on the face of the deep,
when he made firm the skies above,
when he established the fountains of the deep,
when he assigned to the sea its limit,
so that the waters might not transgress his command,
when he marked out the foundations of the earth,
then I was beside him, like a master workman,
and I was daily his delight,
rejoicing before him always,
rejoicing in his inhabited world
and delighting in the children of man.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/20/2010 10:40:46 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 10/20/2010 2:30 PM (GMT -6) | | John 16:13-15 - Jesus says the Spirit will take what is Jesus' and show it to the disciples
•Gal. 4:6 - Holy Spirit as "the Spirit of the Son"
•Rom. 8:9 - Holy Spirit as "the Spirit of Christ"
•Phil. 1:19 - Holy Spirit as "the Spirit of Jesus Christ"
•John 14:16, 15:26, 16:7 - Jesus sends the Holy Spirit
•John 20:22 - Jesus breathes on the disciples and says, "Receive the Holy Spirit"
I don't see these as ontological statements. I see them, rather, as functional statements, statements of relationship; those verses say something about the manner in which salvific history is conducted, not about from where the Spirit originated—I don't think anyone listening to Jesus or Paul talking about the Spirit was thinking about how the Spirit exists (Greek or Latin thinking, as it may be) but, rather, how the Spirit fulfills God's purposes in regard to salvific history. This is not to deny the person of the Holy Spirit, but it is to say that what we are given in the verses above is not a 101-class on where, or from whom, the Holy Spirit originated.
I do believe that the Father is the fount of Divinity, for sure. But as I've said here before, the traditional and classic definition of the Trinity is just not as simple as "Within the nature of the Godhead there are three persons, all of whom are God." This leaves too many open-ended problems (as we've trekked through here before); namely, that if each of the "persons" has a mind (and will) of his own, then we've got three Gods, not one. So, leaving the Holy-Spirit-origination issue behind for the moment, and sticking more along the vein of D's starter post...
We know that the Father was always in relationship with the Word. Regardless of how this relationship worked, there is no need to throw in a third-party concept of the Holy Spirit, who was also "there" and doing who knows what. To think such, I believe, misses something very important: the concept of the Holy Spirit in regard to the relationship between the Father and the Word is all about God saying something to everything else that is. In other words, the Holy Spirit is all about the presence of God everywhere, declaring the reality of God's ever-present essence and His fullness all in all.
As it regards salvific history, if we look more at the Spirit as being who God is rather than what God is, then maybe we can see that the presence of God is, in whole, the presence of both the Father and the Word made visible to everything that is. The glory of God—found in the found of the Father's Divinity—is radiated by being declared through His presence to everything that He has created.
In other words, you do not have the Father without the Word, and you do not have the visibility (revelation) of this without the Spirit. But we are too quick, at this point, to jump to the classical thinking of the Holy Spirit as some sort of third party, a person separate but still God, which I think misses the boat, particularly in the grand glory of God in general, but also in the workings of God's manner of relating to us. (Again, I'm not denying that the Spirit is a person, but I'm trying desperately to avoid making Him a "third party" of the Godhead.)
Since there never was a time when the Father was not in relationship with the Word (however that had taken place, and now takes place with the Word having become flesh), and since God's presence has always been everywhere (because God is Spirit), then we need go no further (for salvific history purposes) in understanding that the "Holy Spirit" is simply the presence of God. It's not about where the Holy Spirit originates; it is, though, all about who He is, because He is everywhere. And, most importantly, where the presence of God is, there is a "person" present.
The Spirit was no less present on earth before He was "sent" to us—God has always been present, everywhere, period. The Spirit, being the very presence of God, was not sent in some sort of packaged deal that hadn't yet arrived. I mean, the disciples didn't sit around saying, "Well, we're just waiting for the Spirit—God's presence—to show up before we proceed," as if God really wasn't present until the "Spirit" showed up. How absurd! All those statements in Scripture about the coming of the Holy Spirit, His being sent to us, His subservient nature, are not ontological, but are functional for purpose of salvific history.
So in Scripture, we acknowledge some sort of differentiation between the Father and the Word, but we do not need to do the same between the Father/Word and the Holy Spirit, and we can do so without destroying the person of the Holy Spirit. For if God IS Spirit (and He is), then where the Spirit is, there is personhood, but not in a third-party concept. (I don't even like the idea of the Father being called the first party, and the Son being called the second party, but I have to relinquish a path perhaps more clear toward that destination than I do a path of the Holy Spirit being a third party.)
Jesse Duplantis once told a congregation about his trip to heaven. He said he saw the Father on a throne and the Son next to Him, but the Spirit wasn't around. When he asked someone near him, "Say, where's the Holy Spirit," the reply was that He is on earth, as if "duh!" To me, this is about as far out in left field as it gets.
You won't see the Holy Spirit sitting around the throne, as if He's some sort of enclosed being. Again, when we say "Holy Spirit," we are talking about the presence of God, which is already everywhere. The Spirit with us IS the presence of God. As it pertains to God's relationship with us, that "with us" becomes quite personal, not just because the Spirit is with us but "why" He is still with us. Not an origination issue, but a relational issue. Even in heaven, worshiping as we will by saying "Holy, holy, holy" is the Lord God on the throne, and the Lamb," we will say such not while looking around for the Holy Spirit to show up, but with the Holy Spirit being the one in, around and through everything that is, making such worship possible.
To sum up here, the presence of God is Spirit, which is personhood, which is everywhere, even where fallen mankind is found. Thus, the Holy Spirit doesn't need to be seen as having originated from either the Father or the Son or both. For the Spirit is the unseen evidence of not only God's existence, but of all who God is.
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 10/20/2010 3:59 PM (GMT -6) | | D: The Holy Spirit is "how" the God the Father knows himself. Again, this is just Scripture.
T: If that's the case, then the Spirit is person BEFORE the Father knows himself, for the MEANS of self-knowledge must precede the knowing of the self. The problem with this is that the person of the Father is supposed to spirate (or be responsible for, whatever) the personal existence of the Spirit. But if the person of the Father spirates the Spirit, then surely the Father already (logically speaking) perceives/knows himself. But you've got the Spirit aleady spirated BEFORE the Father (who spirates the Spirit) even knows himself. Indeed you've got the person of the Spirit being how the Father even knows himself. This comes close to making the Spirit more the source and ground of the Father than the other order. I know you're not SAYING this, but I hope you see my point. How does the Father who doesn't even know himself spirate the person of the Spirit SO THAT the Spirit can then in turn empower/enable the Father to self-perceive? Doesn't make sense.
I'm a bit uncomfortable slicing it up like this, but that kinda gets at the problem I'm having with what you're saying.
I really don't think Paul's "no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God" should be pressed much to make your point. THe feeling I get is that all Paul means is that there's no way we can know God's thoughts except by means of the Spirit.
Then there's the very interesting and thorny question of comparitive triune relations. That is, the Father is father to the Son, and the Son the son OF the Father. But what is Father to the Spirit? And likewise what is Son to Spirit? If sonship is a relation of having-been-begotten-of, and Fatherhood the relation of having-begotton, then how are we to describe the relation of the Father to the Spirit. It's not that of being-begotton. Likewise, what of the relationship of Son to Spirit? Are they siblings of a sort (by virtue of having the same--what?--not 'Father', for he who is father to the Son is not 'Father' to the Spirit). Given D's view, it's more the Spirit who is responsible for the Father (by enabling the Father even to perceive himself).
Thinking out loud,
Tom
Tom
KIXYTΘEMTA Post Edited (Tom) : 10/20/2010 8:30:45 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/20/2010 10:31 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
Given D's view, it's more the Spirit who is responsible for the Father (by enabling the Father even to perceive himself).
The Spirit is "responsible" for God the Father being a Father in the same way that a potential "mother" is responsible for a human male being able to perceive himself as father: Without her empowerment of the process, it would only be a desire unactualized. Analogy: Adam<=>God the Father, Eve<=>God the Spirit, Seth<=>God the Son.
And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth
--Genesis 5:3
Could Adam have done this without Eve? Nope. Eve was "responsible" for Adam being a father of a son "in his own likeness, after his image." Another one. Could Abram been Abr AHam...without Sarah? Nope. Sarah was "responsible" for Abram to BE Abraham in and through Issac. The whole Proverbs 8 thing, man. What if the Wisdom of God the Father (spoken of in first person female terms) is nothing more or less than the Spirit of Wisdom, the Father's Holy Spirit? Just what if. Here is another analogy that helps me. God as Singer. Singing the Song "I Am." God the Father==>Singer God the Spirit==>Singer's Self-Understanding and Voice God the Son==>Singer's Self-Expression in Vocalized Song It makes sense, you see? You can't have a singer with self-expression in song. But you can't have self-expression in song without the singer's self-understanding and voice for the sake of self-expression. And it's obvious that you cannot have any self-expression in song OR self-understanding and voice if there is no "self" to compose the world as "singer". Something else. Notice how there is a reciprocal relationship between the Voice and Vocalized Self-Expression. Without something to sing, a singer's voice is muted. Without a singer's voice, no song can be heard. But the singer's voice is always IN his song of self-expression...even as the song expresses the self-understanding and voice of the singer. All three aspects make up the one reality of what it MEANS to be a singer. Moreover, I want to say that it is the singer using his power to sing (self-understanding and voice) to self-objectify himself in song of self-expression that "begets" the song of self-expression...the singer cannot actualize his self-expression without his self-understanding and voice. But neither can the singer BE a true singer without acting AS singer producing song. The song must be there to bring the singer into being. Otherwise, the singer would never express himself in using his voice, thereby never being a singer at all. So...all in all...I want to say (somehow) that the relationship between a singer and the singer's self-understanding and voice...is analogous to the relationship between God the Father and the Father's Holy Spirit. The Spirit is "responsible" for God the Father being a Father in the same way that the singer's self-understanding (as singer) and singing voice is "responsible" for the person being a Singer at all....just like a potential mother is "responsible" for being an indispensible "helper" for a male to actualize his desire and ability to be a father through offspring. And I want to say that the relationship between the Son and Spirit are like unto the relationship between the singer's self-expressive song and his self-understanding and voice: indivisible yet unconfusable as they "bear" one another in reality. No singing without voice. No voice without singing. Just like the bond of a mother with an 8 month-old-baby in the womb. No "baby" without "mother". No "mother" without "baby."All this makes TOOOOOOOOOTAL sense...right? 
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/20/2010 11:51:04 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/20/2010 11:20 PM (GMT -6) | | Something else. Looking at Kallistos Ware's "Orthodox Way" again, I saw a mention about an early Syriac father called Aphrahat . Ware says that he "speaks of the believer's love for 'God his Father and the Holy Spirit his Mother' ". I did some more diggin on and there seems to be a tradition around the same time as he and this other guy named Ephrem ...that specifically believed that the Holy Spirit is the "feminine" aspect of God that comes directly from God the Father. Check this quote out from this Ephrem guy...
"It is not said of Eve that she was Adam's sister or his daughter, but that she came from him; likewise it is not to be said that the Spirit is a daughter or a sister, but that (she) is FROM God and consubstantial with him."
Bottom line: There's historical precedent for the analogy I'm talking about (Holy Spirit as Father's "helper" ala Eve to Adam).
Cool, huh?
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/20/2010 11:54:23 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/20/2010 11:31 PM (GMT -6) | | To the analogies:
God the Father==>Singer, Adam (as source of image), Abram (as Abraham)
God the Spirit==>Singer's Self-Understanding and Voice, Eve, Sarah
God the Son==>Singer's Self-Expression in Vocalized Song, Seth (as image of Adam), Issac (as reason for Abram's name change)
Three-in-one realities:
1) A Singer expressing and experiencing himself as Singer by singing the song "I Am Singing" 
2) The Adamic Family
3) The "First Family" of Judeo-Christian Faith.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/21/2010 12:48:28 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 10/21/2010 6:40 AM (GMT -6) | | | 1 Cor. says no one knows the things of man but the spirit of man and no one knows the things of God but the Spirit of God. A spirit is not necessarily GENERATING a being by CONDITIONING some or all of its capacities. I would not assume that humans are GENERATED by human spirits.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/21/2010 11:18 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
But you haven't said the Spirit is responsible for the Father's ability to perceive himself "as a _____ " (fill in the blank) the way the Son empowers the Father to perceive himself as a Father. You've said the Spirit enable to Father to "perceive himself" PERIOD. That's quite different. You basically have the Spirit generating the Father, i.e., responsible for the Father's being anything at all. (The Spirit as feminine is fine, but it's something quite different.)
As I'm understanding the analogy in Paul's language (treated very well by James Loder in multiple books, by the way)...the Holy Spirit is the means by which God's self-knowledge and self-communication take place...like unto how the human spirit is the means by which a human being knows and communicates themselves. Check it...
The spirit of man is the lamp of the LORD, searching all his innermost parts.
Proverbs 20:27
What Paul is saying is this: Just like the spirit of man of the lamp of the Lord that "shines a light" upon and searches through all the innermost depths of human being for the sake of knowledge and revelation...SO ALSO the Holy Spirit of God is the means by which the depths of God are plumbed and revealed. When he says that "no one can know a person's thoughts except that person's own spirit" ...he is basically talking about the uniqueness found in one's conscience (self-knowledge within and without oneself). Thus, it is only by the human spirit that one's particular, unique human truth is known. Analogously, it is only by the person of the Holy Spirit that God the Father's particular divine truth is known.
No one's going to disagree with this, right?
So, the question is this: is it the case that the Father can "search all his innermost parts" apart from the activity of the Holy Spirit? If so, how?
************************************
Tom:
That's why I don't think Paul's language there can be used to say what D is trying to say--viz., that since no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God that the person of the Spirit precedes (in ontological priority) the person of the Father. I don't think D would say he's positing such a priority, but it sure looks like it to me. What else would it mean if the person of the Spirit precedes (as ontological prerequisite) the Father? If there's some other limited sense in which the Spirit conditions the Father's personal identity, yes, let's hear it. But it looks like D is saying more than that when he says the Father cannot even self-perceive, period, apart from the Spirit. That looks like Spirit is fount and head, not Father.
We are not dealing first and foremost with logical priority of triune being here. All I'm saying is that BIBLICALLY the Holy Spirit is needed for the "depths" of God the Father (whom is being referenced by Paul in the Scripture) to be searched and known.
Just answer this, Tom: Is it UNTRUE that "no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God"? Basically, you are saying that it is the case that God the Father ability to "search His own depths" in self-knowledge without the essential aid from the Holy Spirit? Further, it seems like you are saying that Paul simply meant to say that no HUMAN BEING can know the thoughts of God without the Holy Spirit (which is true). But that "in the same way" leads me to believe that it's a little MORE than that involved, particularly because of the language.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/21/2010 12:11:34 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/21/2010 2:52 PM (GMT -6) | |
Ok. Let's go from here, shall we? All things have been handed over to me by my Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.Matthew 11:27 Ok. I see something. Does this Scripture mean that the Holy Spirit doesn't know the Son or the Father...because he is neither Son nor Father? Well, obviously not...otherwise it would blatently contradict 1 Corinthians 2:11. The Spirit DOES know God the Father and God the Son. So someone like Tom could say that if the Matthew 11:27 Scripture shouldn't be taken at face value such that it implies that the Spirit has no knowledge of the Father and Son....then the same logic applies to 1 Cor. 2:11 where we can't say that because the Father and the Son aren't the Holy Spirit then they cannot "know the thoughts of God." We can't just say that on the 1 Cor. 2:11 text alone. I'll definitely grant that. There's gotta be something else... ...which there is.  Let's put some things together...8 things, actually. 1) The Holy Spirit belongs to God the Father and the Father does things "by His Spirit." (Ezekiel 36, Joel 2:28-29, Zechariah 4:6)
2) The Holy Spirit is the God the Father's Spirit upon Jesus as God's Messiah. (Luke 4:16-21)
3) God the Father has unique knowledge of Son (Mat 11:27)
4) God the Son has unique knowledge of the Father (Mat 11:27)
5) God the Son can reveal his unique knowledge of the Father to others he chooses. (Mat 11:27)
6) The Holy Spirit will not "speak on his own authority", but will only "declare" what belongs to God the Son--and thereby, what belongs to the the Father. (John 16: 13-15)
7) Eternal life is the knowledge of the Father and the Son and it is found by "sowing to the Spirit" (John 17:3; Galatians 6:8)
8) Knowledge of God the Father and Son is eternal life...only revealed by the Holy Spirit of God. (John 16:13-15; 1 Cor. 10-16)Now, it seems to me that what can explain all 8 of these ideas is the following: God the Holy Spirit is the divine member of the Trinity in whom God the Father and God the Father's "Perfect Image" have their capacities of self-other knowledge, revelation, and communication which is mediated to and indwelling in the human believer. This does NOT mean that the Holy Spirit is the fount of Divinity: God the Father is. The Holy Spirit is God the Father's Spirit and belongs to Him...and is poured out upon Incarnate Son by the Father...to be poured out upon those chosen by the Son. It is not the case that the Spirit "speaks on his own authority" telling the Father what to do. It is also not the case that God the Father's personal being is "breathed" from the actuality of the Holy Spirit. I don't get the idea from these Scriptures that God the Father had the capacity to "image himself" in God the Son (or do anything else) WITHOUT recourse to His Spirit.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/21/2010 3:04:51 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/21/2010 11:13 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
All I'm saying is that the Father is the fount and source, not the Spirit.
Ok. Let it be said that I firmly agree with this. If there is something I'm saying that is NOT aligned with that, then I'll have to figure it out. But at this point, I don't see my perspective as denying Father as fount and source of Divinity.
************************************
D: All I'm saying is that BIBLICALLY the Holy Spirit is needed for the "depths" of God the Father (whom is being referenced by Paul in the Scripture) to be searched and known.
T: I'm not saying that the Spirit is disensible, i.e., remove the Spirit and NOTHING changes. Of course not. But I'm cautious about claims regarding the Father's dependency upon...etc.
Well, Tom. The fact of the matter is that Scripturally speaking, God the Father seems very "reliant" (as the very least) upon his Spirit. The person of the Holy Spirit just IS God the Father's Holy Spirit...proceeding from Him. Not by might, or by power, but by My Spirit, says the LORD.
I suggest the idea of a SYZYGY of God the Father and His Holy Spirit.
See here too.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/21/2010 11:17:59 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 10/22/2010 6:53 AM (GMT -6) | | D: But at this point, I don't see my perspective as denying Father as fount and source of Divinity.
T: Here's how I see it possibly undermining the Father as source/fount. If the person of the Spirit is responsible for the Father's ability to even perceive himself, AND it's true that the Father spirates the Spirit, THEN the spiration of the Spirit is not a PERSONAL act. Indeed the Father would spirate the Spirit without even having to THINK or REFLECT UPON himself as a personal being. This seems entailed in what you say because you've got the PERSON of the Spirit (spirated as person) being she/he BY WHOM the source/fount is even able to perceive himself and thus being prior to the source's PERSONAL identity. Does that make sense?
D: The fact of the matter is that Scripturally speaking, God the Father seems very "reliant" (as the very least) upon his Spirit.
T: Reliance is fine Bro. But there are different ways to be reliant or dependent upon something.
I don't have the Trinity figured out, so I'm not making counter-claims about what I think the Trinity IS. I'm just responding to how your claims appear. Lord knows I could be wrong.
T
KIXYTΘEMTAPost Edited (Tom) : 10/22/2010 2:37:01 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/22/2010 9:02 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 10/23/2010 1:25 PM (GMT -6) | | 1) http://www.theandros.com/comforter.html (I'm feeling Bulgakov's perspective a lot). God as the "tri-hypostatic Subject" and all...
2) I think we're gonna get hung up on what makes a divine Person an actual person. It seems that you are saying that if the Father doesn't self-consciously, self-reflectively will the "procession" of His Holy Spirit (merely doing so in the act of self-referencing)...then that somehow makes the act impersonal. How is that? Morever you see to say that the Father's dependence upon the Spirit for self-referential activity makes him somehow LESS THAN the true source/fount. I can't see how that's true.
3) As I'm understanding him, I like the way that Bulgakov describes the Holy Spirit and her "procession". (He unashamedly refers to the Holy Spirit as "her" ) Boiling it all down, the Holy Spirit is God the Father's Spirit of Wisdom/Love. Basically it's the joyful love that the Father has for the Son...and the "procession" (in general) is that love extending and being consummated. His view is DISTINCT from the Latin/Western/Roman Catholic view of the Holy Spirit being "spirated" only by the Father AND the Son. He affirms that God the Father is the source and fount, insofar as everthing that the Holy Spirit and Son are is grounded in the Father. At the same time, the Holy Spirit embodies the "intra-Trinitarian completion of the sacrificial love of the Father and the Son". It's pretty much like the whole dispositional conversation. God the Spirit is in God the Father empowering his ecstatic, self-giving love for the Son he eternally begets. (God the Father's individual ecstatic love) But God the Spirit is ALSO in the Father/Son relationship as it is consummated as BOTH Father and Son live out ecstatic, self-giving love. (The Trinity's tri-hypostatic kenosis/plerosis)
John 17. What's in the believer? 1) the Love that the Father has for the Son and 2) the Son himself (who, as Image, has the Father's type of love as well). How are both of these actually in the believer? By the Holy Spirit. In other words, the Holy Spirit is the one who generates the Father's Love for the Son in us because its' her "home turf", as it were...AND...produces in us the filial sense of the Son so that we can claim "Abba, Father" as adopted "sons-in-the-Son"
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 10/23/2010 6:05:59 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 6:29 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|