Theolo-Lunch: Trinitarianism and the Imago Dei

...

Wed, 03 Aug 2005 09:55:15 +0100

Yup, all limited but we all have one we like to use. My Pizza pie one I use to describe the righteousness of God. heh. - Rey

...

Tue, 02 Aug 2005 10:02:40 +0100

I\'ve always hesitated using the \"egg\" analogy or the ice/water/vapor analogy for the reasons stated below. But lately I\'ve been wondering if a \"cake\" could be used as an effective analogy. You have flour, eggs, and sugar that make up a cake. They are three unique ingredients that make up one unique object. If you\'re missing one, there can be no cake at all.

Of course, it does not describe the action that can be taken by each of the the \"persons\" of the trinity. So it\'s kinda limited in that regard. But then again, nothing\'s perfect. - brian

...

Mon, 01 Aug 2005 19:44:48 +0100

I don\'t think we\'re throwing away all illustrations. I think we\'re looking at them and seeing their flaws and acknowledging what they illustrate. If anything, I personally looking for these illustrations to show an aspect of God and then a whole lot of �what God is not�. I guess it would be like a negative theology because it still paints a picture beyond the pictures we posit. Get my meaning? - Rey

...

Mon, 01 Aug 2005 14:57:55 +0100

Completely understanding Jeremy\'s hesitation to embrace any one analogy, and agreeing that the uniqueness of God prohibits any created thing to fully realize what the Trinity is, I think that it is dangerous to just discard all analogies. The analogy of the egg is good because it helps understand the oneness (even though the parts are still seperate and so the analogy is incomplete). The analogy of a grandfather is good to understand the differences (even though the differences are not different persons, thus incomplete again). Your analogy of thought, word, deed I think is also good to explain the action of God (though, as Jeremy is right in saying, it could lead to modalism). So, perhaps rather than just saying that no analogy is sufficient, it is necessary to embrace a number of analogies for how the relationship of the Trinity exists... - Philthreten

...

Sat, 30 Jul 2005 08:48:29 +0100

Gotcha. It makes the Son, the Spirit, and the Father merely aspects of some being that uses all those parts. So if anything the analogy should be kept at the level of illustrating action but then wrap it up at that. Thanks brother. - Rey

...

Sat, 30 Jul 2005 08:09:05 +0100

Unless God is not unique in being Trinity, no analogy can avoid heresy. If the analogy emphasizes three parts of one thing, then it doesn\'t get at three things, each themselves being the one thing. If it emphasizes three aspects of one thing, you get the same problem. What your analogy does is give three effects of the same thing. It thus leads to the modalist heresy. God is one being who manifests himself in different ways, but each of those ways is just a manifestation of God and not a separate person who is somehow identical with God. Is my thought me? Is my word me? Is my action me? I\'m a fourth thing that has those effects. So all the analogy shows is four separate things, not three things that are fully one thing. - Jeremy Pierce