As some will know I've struggled with the trinity concept-mainly because I can't find anything to grasp onto that I understand.
I'd like to present this idea I've had as a discussion point and to find out if I'm any closer.
The trinity is Father, Son and Spirit.
Like Mind, Body and Spirit.
The Mind is nothing without the Body and the Body can't function without the Mind-all of which is (in my belief/view) quickend by the Spirit. All three are seperat 'entities' that (with the possible execption of 'Spirit', but that's not important to this analagy) can't exist or function without the other.
Am I wrong, nearly there or a heratic (see you at the next bonfire...)?
It's a common way of looking at it . . . but I don't think it's a matter of "absolutely right" or "absolutely wrong." As Faithfulservant says, it's not about logic. Christianity is not like maths or science. It's not about manipulating formulas, functions and values to get the right answer and it's not about formal semantics.
If that works for you, let it be. I used to use that analogy -- mind-body-spirit, but I guess as time progressed, I've kind of moved on. It was like a phase. A season. But then it changed into something else.
The Father is like an "earthly" father (emotionally and psychologically not physically). A God that's intimate and personal.
The Son is a Bridge. He's the Messiah, our spiritual leader, leading us to the Father, God.
That Bridge is a paradigm for Man, showing Man what to do with himself.
That Bridge is also a paradigm for God, showing Man what God is like.
That Bridge, the Son, is our relationship with God. You could see it as a separate entity, but at the same time it's not essential to see it as a separate entity, since it's a relationship. The Son is a projection of the Father.
The Spirit, the Holy Spirit, is a Voice, a Whisper from God in our hearts.
I've seen dozens of ideas of how to form the "doctrine of Trinity" into some logical concept but there are always problems with these ideas because they try to shoe-horn the logical semantics of those ideas into the raw Christian concept and notion of God. I think we will sleep more easily with the "Trinity" if we didn't try to use logic at all!!!! Let it be something natural.
Think about what the Christian concept of God -- the Father, Son and Holy Spirit means to you. How does it depict your spiritual journey? Don't use logic. Use your emotions and feelings. Let it be something intuitive. Most importantly, let it be something personal, something you can relate to.
If you're seeking a logical definition, you might not find one . . . Have a try. Maybe you will and maybe you won't. If you do, let me know. But I don't think a logical definition is necessary. Why do you think God gave human beings emotions and feelings? Do you not think that He wanted us to
discern the path we took in finding and seeking Him? It may be that the Christian concept of God was never meant to be logical, as a logical approach might actually have been an
unnatural one.
One would wonder why the Christian apostles didn't explicitly define a "Trinity." Maybe it's just the terminology that's a Trinity, but the actual God isn't. In other words, maybe it's just an expression of one's spiritual journey. I seek the Father, I am led by the Son and I listen to the promptings of the Spirit. That to me sounds more natural and intuitive. It's something I can relate to personally. The reason why I've kind of moved on from the mind, body and spirit thing is because it doesn't mean anything to me anymore. I decided that I needed something a notch more personal -- I mean, where did I fit in the mind, body and spirit thing? That told me nothing about my relationship with God!!!
But if I say,
I seek the Father,
I am led by the Son and
I listen to the promptings of the Spirit . . .
That tells me what's happening in my relationship with God. I seek Him, I am led to Him and I listen to Him.
In the meantime, though, I should probably let you chew on the mind-body-spirit idea for a while. It's a nice idea. It's a starting point. I guess it's where we all started when we tried to understand this "trinity" thing. You might come up with a better idea further down the road than what I just wrote down.
And, in addition, I, too, may see things differently the next time the question is asked . . .
Good luck.
