4 ms·

They also believe in a three person god. Not sure in which lesson this comes up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church#Nature_of_God https://en.wikiped

They also believe in a three person god. Not sure in which lesson this comes up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church#Nature_of_God https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church#Nature_of_God

Grazester 4y ago
God the son, God the father and God the holy spirit(The trinity). Also mention in pray and referenced in the bible I believe.
- krapp 4y ago
  No, the Trinity is never referenced in the Bible - God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are always treated as separate entities. The doctrine was made up by the Church to avoid the obvious polytheistic implications in the straightforward interpretation of canon.
  - aeneasmackenzie 4y ago
    Jesus and the Father are equated in the very first verse of John.
    - krapp 4y ago
      "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" isn't exactly straightforward.
      - olddustytrail 4y ago
        It's more straightforward if you read a few more sentences.
        krapp 4y ago
        Not really. It could just as easily be interpreted as referring to two separate beings of equal power and status than one being in two persons. John 10:30 mentioned above seems more clear, but just prior to that you have "My Father who has given them to Me", which makes no sense if they are literally the same being. Neither does Christ on the cross asking why God has forsaken him. The problem is the Biblical canon manifested out of what were countless differing philosophies and schools of thought in early Christianity, and John seems to be one of the more mystical books to make it in. But Christianity couldn't even agree on the nature of Jesus' divinity at first, and went to war against itself for centuries over details like this.
        Amezarak 4y ago
        > Neither does Christ on the cross asking why God has forsaken him. He's quoting Psalm 22. Jesus very frequently quotes the psalms, probably more than any other book, and "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me" is the opening line. Given the number of "coincidences" between the psalm and the events then occurring, he is either deliberately making his claim as a messiah or the redactor inserted the quote, depending on your beliefs. ("They have pierced my hands and feet", "They divide my garments among them, and cast lots for my clothing", "all who see me mock me, they sneer and shake their heads, he trusts in the Lord, let the Lord deliver him.") https://biblehub.com/psalms/22.htm https://biblehub.com/psalms/22.htm I don't really see how it's possible to read John 1 as implying two separate beings, unless we start quibbling about what a "being" is. There are similar statements in the other gospels. > The problem is the Biblical canon manifested out of what were countless differing philosophies and schools of thought in early Christianity, and John seems to be one of the more mystical books to make it in. But Christianity couldn't even agree on the nature of Jesus' divinity at first, and went to war against itself for centuries over details like this. It's true the early churches were divided but it's important not to overstate that division, as you're doing here. The earliest post-apostolic writings we have are already referencing all for gospels and nearly all the epistles. There were divisions in theology on things like the exact nature of Jesus's divinity, but except in the case of niche sects, it was over what most people now would regard as hair-splitting. It's just people used to be much more fanatical and willing to go to war over things like "the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father" vs "the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son" or "The logos/Jesus/Son was co-eternal with Father" vs "the Father created the Son before Time and he's divine but not as divine as the Father." I think the most productive way to view this aspect of Christianity, unless you're addicted to obscure theological disputes, is to simply say that the Christian idea of God is as an omnipotent transcendental being whose nature is therefore obviously something beyond the powers human comprehension, which would make sense if you want to posit the idea of a capital-G God even as a non-Christian.
      - geocrasher 4y ago
        Philippians 2:5,6 clears it up nicely.
    - dc-programmer 4y ago
      The conception of the trinity as co-equal persons of the same substance is a later development in Christianity. The earliest Christian writings (Paul’s letters) never mention the trinity; you could even argue Paul was a sort of binitarian
  - jlkuester7 4y ago
    The Catholic Church has never claimed the Bible is the sole source of religious revelation. Sacred Tradition is regarded and an additional (and not contradictory) source of revelation of the mysteries of God. I am by no means well versed in the deep trinitarian studies and reflections from the past 2000 years, but I am inclined to feel that verses like John 10:30 defy a simple explanation....
BizarreByte 4y ago
The trinity is a fundamental Christian belief, not just Catholic. If one doesn’t believe it than most won’t consider them Christian. This is a huge reason why Mormonism is it’s own thing. I don’t believe anymore as an adult, but this was taught right away when I was a kid going to the Catholic Church. I don’t think you could find a catholic who doesn’t know what the trinity is.
- duped 4y ago
  It's an interesting historical and political question though, since it was the core question of the First Council of Nicea which Constantine used to establish an orthodoxy for his empire. That single church lasted for almost 700 years before splitting in two.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > That single church lasted for almost 700 years before splitting in two. It…didn’t, though; there was a schism (Macedonian) within 7 years, not 700, of Nicaea, and there were even schisms that created separate long-lasting Churches on the side rejecting the view of the part of the Church that survived in union until the Catholic/Orthodox split much sooner than 700 years (e.g., the Nestorian schism in 431 and the Church of the East which survives to this day; the Chalcedonian/Monophysite schism in 451, from which the Oriental Orthodox churches still survive, etc.)
  - timeon 4y ago
    There was already split when Paul joined the church. Just those original Jewish branches (like Ebionites) did not survived to this age.
- sorokod 4y ago
  Not religious in any way - from this perspective the trinity (as nailed down by the council of Nicaea) sounds like a triumvirate of gods + mental acrobatics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea#Agenda https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea#Agenda
- dc-programmer 4y ago
nsxwolf 4y ago
In any sort of Catholic education, this is learned immediately.
- bombcar 4y ago
  I mean this stuff is literally laid out in the Creed which is recited at every mass and various times besides. There are various other Creeds used that make things even more explicit such as the Athanasian Creed. And nothing really is unique to the Catholics, the Orthodox are onboard for this stuff. I believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible. I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets. I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.
  - nsxwolf 4y ago
    Yeah, non-trinitarian Christianity is Mormons, Jehovas Witnesses, and it gets much more obscure from there.
    - 988747 4y ago
      Neither Mormons nor Jehovas Witnesses are considered Christians.
      - 4y ago

Grazester 4y ago

God the son, God the father and God the holy spirit(The trinity). Also mention in pray and referenced in the bible I believe.

krapp 4y ago
No, the Trinity is never referenced in the Bible - God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are always treated as separate entities. The doctrine was made up by the Church to avoid the obvious polytheistic implications in the straightforward interpretation of canon.
- aeneasmackenzie 4y ago
  Jesus and the Father are equated in the very first verse of John.
  - krapp 4y ago
    "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" isn't exactly straightforward.
    - olddustytrail 4y ago
      It's more straightforward if you read a few more sentences.
      - krapp 4y ago
        Not really. It could just as easily be interpreted as referring to two separate beings of equal power and status than one being in two persons. John 10:30 mentioned above seems more clear, but just prior to that you have "My Father who has given them to Me", which makes no sense if they are literally the same being. Neither does Christ on the cross asking why God has forsaken him. The problem is the Biblical canon manifested out of what were countless differing philosophies and schools of thought in early Christianity, and John seems to be one of the more mystical books to make it in. But Christianity couldn't even agree on the nature of Jesus' divinity at first, and went to war against itself for centuries over details like this.
        Amezarak 4y ago
        > Neither does Christ on the cross asking why God has forsaken him. He's quoting Psalm 22. Jesus very frequently quotes the psalms, probably more than any other book, and "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me" is the opening line. Given the number of "coincidences" between the psalm and the events then occurring, he is either deliberately making his claim as a messiah or the redactor inserted the quote, depending on your beliefs. ("They have pierced my hands and feet", "They divide my garments among them, and cast lots for my clothing", "all who see me mock me, they sneer and shake their heads, he trusts in the Lord, let the Lord deliver him.") https://biblehub.com/psalms/22.htm https://biblehub.com/psalms/22.htm I don't really see how it's possible to read John 1 as implying two separate beings, unless we start quibbling about what a "being" is. There are similar statements in the other gospels. > The problem is the Biblical canon manifested out of what were countless differing philosophies and schools of thought in early Christianity, and John seems to be one of the more mystical books to make it in. But Christianity couldn't even agree on the nature of Jesus' divinity at first, and went to war against itself for centuries over details like this. It's true the early churches were divided but it's important not to overstate that division, as you're doing here. The earliest post-apostolic writings we have are already referencing all for gospels and nearly all the epistles. There were divisions in theology on things like the exact nature of Jesus's divinity, but except in the case of niche sects, it was over what most people now would regard as hair-splitting. It's just people used to be much more fanatical and willing to go to war over things like "the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father" vs "the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son" or "The logos/Jesus/Son was co-eternal with Father" vs "the Father created the Son before Time and he's divine but not as divine as the Father." I think the most productive way to view this aspect of Christianity, unless you're addicted to obscure theological disputes, is to simply say that the Christian idea of God is as an omnipotent transcendental being whose nature is therefore obviously something beyond the powers human comprehension, which would make sense if you want to posit the idea of a capital-G God even as a non-Christian.
    - geocrasher 4y ago
      Philippians 2:5,6 clears it up nicely.
  - dc-programmer 4y ago
    The conception of the trinity as co-equal persons of the same substance is a later development in Christianity. The earliest Christian writings (Paul’s letters) never mention the trinity; you could even argue Paul was a sort of binitarian
- jlkuester7 4y ago
  The Catholic Church has never claimed the Bible is the sole source of religious revelation. Sacred Tradition is regarded and an additional (and not contradictory) source of revelation of the mysteries of God. I am by no means well versed in the deep trinitarian studies and reflections from the past 2000 years, but I am inclined to feel that verses like John 10:30 defy a simple explanation....

BizarreByte 4y ago

The trinity is a fundamental Christian belief, not just Catholic. If one doesn’t believe it than most won’t consider them Christian. This is a huge reason why Mormonism is it’s own thing. I don’t believe anymore as an adult, but this was taught right away when I was a kid going to the Catholic Church. I don’t think you could find a catholic who doesn’t know what the trinity is.

duped 4y ago
It's an interesting historical and political question though, since it was the core question of the First Council of Nicea which Constantine used to establish an orthodoxy for his empire. That single church lasted for almost 700 years before splitting in two.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > That single church lasted for almost 700 years before splitting in two. It…didn’t, though; there was a schism (Macedonian) within 7 years, not 700, of Nicaea, and there were even schisms that created separate long-lasting Churches on the side rejecting the view of the part of the Church that survived in union until the Catholic/Orthodox split much sooner than 700 years (e.g., the Nestorian schism in 431 and the Church of the East which survives to this day; the Chalcedonian/Monophysite schism in 451, from which the Oriental Orthodox churches still survive, etc.)
- timeon 4y ago
  There was already split when Paul joined the church. Just those original Jewish branches (like Ebionites) did not survived to this age.
sorokod 4y ago
Not religious in any way - from this perspective the trinity (as nailed down by the council of Nicaea) sounds like a triumvirate of gods + mental acrobatics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea#Agenda https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea#Agenda
dc-programmer 4y ago

nsxwolf 4y ago

In any sort of Catholic education, this is learned immediately.

bombcar 4y ago
I mean this stuff is literally laid out in the Creed which is recited at every mass and various times besides. There are various other Creeds used that make things even more explicit such as the Athanasian Creed. And nothing really is unique to the Catholics, the Orthodox are onboard for this stuff. I believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible. I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets. I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.
- nsxwolf 4y ago
  Yeah, non-trinitarian Christianity is Mormons, Jehovas Witnesses, and it gets much more obscure from there.
  - 988747 4y ago
    Neither Mormons nor Jehovas Witnesses are considered Christians.
    - 4y ago