The corner

[Matthias]

In conversation this morning @David Lamb suggested to me in another thread -

”Putting ‘the Trinity’ in one corner and ‘Jewish monotheism’ in another is a false dichotomy.”

Dichotomy - “a difference between two completely opposite ideas or things.”

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/dichotomy

He continues,

”Believing in the Trinity is not believing in three Gods. Believers in the Trinity are also Monotheists. They too believe in one God. They believe that the one God exists in three ‘Persons’, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.”

The reader needs to know in advance that I agree with what he says here about believing in the Trinity.

Do they belong in the same corner? The axis of the question is dichotomy.

 

[Jay Ross]

Do they belong in the same corner? The axis of the question is dichotomy.

In your poll, there should be the opportunity to vote for, "I do not care."

Why do I not care? Because any debate on this is ****************.

People can put in the word that describes their disinterest in the topic. The discussion is all about "Bull conquering brains," which is, IMHO, pointless when both are coming to the same conclusion from their respective starting points.

 

[Behold]

God created man as a Tri-Part being, becasue we are made in the "image (likeness) of God".. who said......"let US... make man in OUR Image".

So, man is.......Body... Soul.......Spirit, (3) yet man is ONE Person., so that is 3 as ONE.

God is One, and He is Tri-Part.......Father.......Son........Holy Spirit, so that is 3, as ONE.

 

[Matthias]

In your poll, there should be the opportunity to vote for, "I do not care."

Why do I not care? Because any debate on this is ****************.

People can put in the word that describes their disinterest in the topic. The discussion is all about "Bull conquering brains," which is, IMHO, pointless when both are coming to the same conclusion from their respective starting points.

Thanks. I considered putting that option in the poll. I probably should have but it falls outside the demographic I’m trying to capture. My thinking at the time was that those who don’t care likely wouldn’t bother to vote in the poll.

I’m not looking for debate. Ever. About anything.

This thread has nothing whatsoever to do with debating the Trinity or Jewish monotheism.

I’ve been speaking with people on the Internet for almost 30 years. In all that time, this is the first time that anyone has ever suggested to me that it’s a false dichotomy. I seldom hear anything about the concepts that I haven’t already heard many times over. That’s what captured my attention in this morning’s conversation with @David Lamb. It has me wondering how many others think it’s a false dichotomy. That’s all.

 

[JustMe]

Jewish monotheism and the Christian doctrine of the Trinity are often seen as a (TRUE) dichotomy due to their fundamental differences in understanding the nature of God. Jewish tradition maintains strict monotheism, emphasizing the oneness of God without division or distinction within the deity, as reflected in the Shema prayer which states, "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one" (Deuteronomy 6).

TRINITY - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

Technically, one is a personal (who- one person) God, and the other a personal (what- three persons) God.

One is the primitive, original form of monotheism, the other a later design or form.

 

[Matthias]

Jewish monotheism and the Christian doctrine of the Trinity are often seen as a (TRUE) dichotomy due to their fundamental differences in understanding the nature of God. Jewish tradition maintains strict monotheism, emphasizing the oneness of God without division or distinction within the deity, as reflected in the Shema prayer which states, "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one" (Deuteronomy 6).

TRINITY - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

Technically, one is a personal (who- one person) God, and the other a personal (what- three persons) God.

One is the primitive, original form of monotheism, the other a later design or form.

I’ve had many trinitarians over the years either point this out to me or agree with me that it is a true dichotomy. This is the first time that anyone - trinitarian or non-trinitarian - has mentioned to me that they see it as a false dichotomy. I find that fascinating. I’m hoping that @David Lamb will elaborate on it.

 

[talons]

Should the Trinity and Messianic Jewish monotheism be put in the same corner? ​

Yes

 

[Matthias]

Should the Trinity and Messianic Jewish monotheism be put in the same corner? ​

Yes

Thanks.

Messianic Jews fall into two groups: trinitarian (they have rejected Jewish monotheism) and unitarian (they affirm Jewish monotheism and vehemently reject trinitarianism.) The trinitarian group is much larger than the unitarian group.

The two groups don’t get along well with one another, to put it mildly. I don’t get along well with the trinitarian group, and not particularly well with the unitarian group (they tend to reject Paul, whereas I endorse and affirm Paul.)

Does that make any difference in how you would vote in the poll?

 

[talons]

Does that make any difference in how you would vote in the poll?

No difference .

 

[JustMe]

I’ve had many trinitarians over the years either point this out to me or agree with me that it is a true dichotomy. This is the first time that anyone - trinitarian or non-trinitarian - has mentioned to me that they see it as a false dichotomy. I find that fascinating. I’m hoping that @David Lamb will elaborate on it.

I would think, honestly, that it is a very difficult undertaking, even impossible to reconcile. The part that is impossible to avoid in this elaboration is the common essence of the same nature of three persons as only one single God.

It's like someone standing besides me saying they see only one lion with one nature, although there clearly are three lions of the exact same one nature. It cannot be said there is only one lion present because these three same lions in front of me have the same one nature. One nature does not dictate just only one lion present as supreme king of the jungle in this case- in reality there are three animal kings who are equally supreme, as three gods of the jungle, and not one cardinal god of the jungle.

 

[Matthias]

No difference .

Okay. Thanks.

Anecdote. Once upon a time … I was sitting at a dining table with one of the leaders of the unitarian group (he is an Israeli, and he was on a speaking tour in the U.S. at the time to raise funds for a Foundation he headed), having a pleasant conversation with him. All was going well until … lunch was served. (I had nothing to do with what was on the menu.) Beef, pork and chicken were offered to us on a platter by a waitress. No problem for me; major problem for him. He exploded, ended the conversation abruptly, and refused to have anything further to do with me (or anyone else attending the meeting.) He caused quite a commotion - just short of turning over the table and driving everyone out of the building. He was outraged (over being offered “unclean meat”) and immediately withdrew from the meeting.

 

[Lambano]

Should the Trinity and Messianic Jewish monotheism be put in the same corner? ​

Yes

But you voted "No". Was that a mistake?

 

[Aunty Jane]

Should the Trinity and Jewish monotheism be put in the same corner?

I do not know how they possibly can be…..these are two entirely different concepts of supposedly the same deity, accepted in two completely different biblical eras, but who do not resemble one another at all. And yet we have Biblical confirmation that “God does not change”.

Read in Hebrew at Deut 6:4, this is the Shema….and it states quite simply….

4 “Hear, O Israel: The Lord is our God; the Lord is one.”

דשְׁמַ֖ע יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל יְהֹוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵ֖ינוּ יְהֹוָ֥ה | אֶחָֽד:

In the Hebrew text, the Tatragrammaton is mentioned twice. “The Lord” is “יְהֹוָ֥ה” Yahweh….so it literally reads…
”Hear O Israel: Yahweh is our God; Yahweh is one”.
This oft recited Biblical truth was addressed to God’s people….a statement that made Israel different to all the other nations, all of whom had multiple gods, some with limited power.

Yahweh was one God, “Almighty”, (Omnipotent) and all knowing (Omniscient) who shared power and authority with no one…he was not portrayed with multiple personalities who could be in different paces at the same time, and who could carry out conversations with one another.

Throughout Israel’s history Yahweh was only ever one entity. As a Jew, Yahweh was the God whom Jesus served and worshipped. (Acts4:27; Rev 3:12)
He was also the God worshipped by his Jewish apostles. (1 Cor 8:5-6)

But comparing Christendom’s god, who has these multiple personalities……and who can have different wills….and even hide information from one another, how is there even a comparison?

These are two separate gods who have virtually nothing in common. So they are, in my Bible educated opinion, two completely different “deities”….in opposite corners.

We must choose the God whom Jesus worshipped and still does.
Jewish monotheism was never superseded….and Jesus said we had to “know the only true God AND the one he sent” in order to gain everlasting life…..(John 17:3) That’s two separate beings….not three in one head.

 

[Lambano]

I'll take the time to explain the reason I voted "Yes" (they belong in the same corner). The doctrine IN THE FORM IT IS STATED (three hypostases; one ousia) is a concession to classical Jewish monotheism. My understanding is that by the time Nicaea and Chalcedon rolled around, the Church had already concluded that both the Father and the Son were divine, if I am using the term "divine" correctly. (The Holy Spirit is somewhat of an afterthought.) Since the oneness of God is non-negotiable (Jesus Himself affirms this in Mark 12:29), the official statement from the Councils defining the Trinity was carefully formulated to support Christ's divinity while retaining monotheism. And it bears all the marks of having been designed by committee.

To reiterate: This is not a debate; I am attempting to explain why I voted the way I did.

 

[Lambano]

• Don’t know​

  Votes: 00.0%

• Don’t care​

  Votes: 00.0%

The story goes that some university polled their students, "What do you see as the bigger problem in student government, ignorance or apathy?" The majority answer was, "I don't know, and I don't care."

 

[Matthias]

I'll take the time to explain the reason I voted "Yes" (they belong in the same corner). The doctrine IN THE FORM IT IS STATED (three hypostases; one ousia) is a concession to classical Jewish monotheism. My understanding is that by the time Nicaea and Chalcedon rolled around, the Church had already concluded that both the Father and the Son were divine, if I am using the term "divine" correctly. (The Holy Spirit is somewhat of an afterthought.) Since the oneness of God is non-negotiable (Jesus Himself affirms this in Mark 12:29), the official statement from the Councils defining the Trinity was carefully formulated to support Christ's divinity while retaining monotheism. And it bears all the marks of having been designed by committee.

To reiterate: This is not a debate; I am attempting to explain why I voted the way I did.

Thanks. That’s exactly what I’m looking for in this thread, whether I’m persuaded by it or not: an explanation for why someone would see it as a false dichotomy and not a true dichotomy.

I’m challenged by your thought process, and I appreciate you taking the time to share it with us.

Akhenaton was a monotheist. Since “monotheism” is, apparently, the key to seeing trinitary monotheism (not to mention binitary monotheism) and Jewish monotheism (which is unitarian) as a false dichotomy rather than a true dichotomy, would you then put pagan monotheism in the same corner with the Trinity and Jewish monotheism?

 

[Matthias]

“The Christian conception of God, argues Gregory of Nyssa, is neither the polythism of the Greeks nor the monotheism of the Jews and consequently it must be true, for ‘the truth passes in the mean between these two conceptions, destroying each heresy, and yet, accepting what is useful to it from each. The Jewish dogma is destroyed by the acceptance of the Word and by belief in the Spirit, while the polytheistic error of the Greek school is made to vanish by the unity of the nature abrogating the imagination of plurality.’”

(Harry Austryn Wolfson, The Philosophy of the Church Fathers, Vol. 1, pp. 362-363, Second Edition, Revised)

Gregory of Nyssa is one of the key trinitarian figures in the 4th century. I offer for consideration his testimony as a representative voice of Nicene Christianity.

It’s clear to me that Gregory doesn’t view the Trinity and Jewish monotheism as a “false ”dichotomy”. If we accept his voice as representative of his time, this presents a strong historical argument from the trinitarian perspective for those who see it as a “true dichotomy”.

@Lambano and @talons I’d like to hear your thoughts on this. Does what Gregory of Nyssa said (on behalf of historical orthodox trinitarianism, as a representative voice, I’ve suggested) cause you to change your mind on the question of dichotomy?

 

[JustMe]

• Don’t know​

  Votes: 00.0%

• Don’t care​

  Votes: 00.0%

The story goes that some university polled their students, "What do you see as the bigger problem in student government, ignorance or apathy?" The majority answer was, "I don't know, and I don't care."

Then shouldn't the vote tallies reflect more that 0%?

 

[Lambano]

di·chot·o·my
[dīˈkädəmē]
noun
dichotomy (noun) · dichotomies (plural noun)

1. a division or contrast between two things that are, or are represented as being, opposed or entirely different:
   "a rigid dichotomy between science and mysticism" · "I try not to reduce things to binary options because that usually results in a false dichotomy"

 

[Lambano]

"'...while the polytheistic error of the Greek school is made to vanish by the unity of the nature abrogating the imagination of plurality.’”

I've seen Islamic literature that considers Christians shirk, polytheists. Greg does not.

I have noticed that trinitarianism has subtly changed "God" from referring to a single Person to a nature (or ousia) to get around the polytheism charge. That change is the root cause of one of my own frustrations with Trinitarian discourse: The conflating of the different persons of the Trinity as a single person, which they're not. Persons relate to different persons differently.