Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Stoppelmann]

I think this topic offers us the opportunity to consider Christianity...

One thing I forgot to mention in my previous post (above) was the Christian Trinity. The similarity to other 'triple Gods' rarely seems to be discussed.

Various triune or triple goddesses, or deities who appeared in groupings of three, were known to ancient religion. Well-known examples include Tridevi (Saraswati, Lakshmi, Kali), the Charites (Graces), the Horae (Seasons, of which there were three in the ancient Hellenistic reckoning), and the Moirai (Fates). Some deities generally depicted as singular also included triplicate aspects. In Stymphalos, Hera was worshiped as a Girl, a Grown-up, and a Widow.

Hecate is another example.

Some Christians might reject this comparison, a sort of knee-jerk response to anything that might appear critical of their faith. But there is a clear and obvious commonality. While Neopagans venerate the Goddess as Maiden. Mother and Crone, Christians adopt a patriarchal version, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost/Spirit.

Does a triple God have particular effects on the faith that follows it/He/She/them?

The concept of The Trinity is extremely complex, and it was developed mainly in the Church, but with some Biblical basis. The idea of the unforgivable sin of 'blasphemy against the Holy Spirit' may be one of the most harsh aspects of the underlying aspects of the idea of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The best explanation of these which I came across was the idea of God as source, son as embodied action and Holy Spirit as the underlying force. However, there is so much at play, including the idea of the Holy Spirit, as a political aspect of the acceptance of the whole persuasion of the authority of 'truth' as in official doctrines of Christianity.

The development of the Christian concept of the Trinity was a gradual process that took several centuries. The idea of the Trinity, as it is commonly understood today, emerged through theological debates, reflections, and clarifications during the early centuries of Christianity. It was an attempt to reconcile and articulate the relationship between God the Father, Jesus Christ (or the Son), and the Holy Spirit. So, you can see that it arose from a problem that some theologians had and not really a necessity, but the Council of Constantinople in 381 CE (!) finally clarified the divinity of the Holy Spirit and affirmed the full Triune nature of God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

The doctrine of the Trinity remains a central tenet of orthodox Christianity today, encompassing the belief in one God who exists as three distinct persons in a mysterious and unified relationship. A non-dualist belief would have no need of such a construct, because God is one and an ultimate unity of all things, which dissolves the boundaries between different entities or persons.

[emilytognon2005]

Although Christianity is a constructive concept in the sense that it provides hope to the individual, it can quickly become a concept that is deconstructive as the constant search for answers can ultimately destabilise the tradition and cause a loss of faith. Instead of focusing on the how and constantly digging for deeper answers as us humans tend to do, we need to just accept the concepts of Christianity that are displayed before us. Sure, it is good to question things, but sometimes we need to have faith and not deconstruct everything to the point that all faith and imagination is diminished.

[JackDaydream]

I think this topic offers us the opportunity to consider Christianity...

One thing I forgot to mention in my previous post (above) was the Christian Trinity. The similarity to other 'triple Gods' rarely seems to be discussed.

Various triune or triple goddesses, or deities who appeared in groupings of three, were known to ancient religion. Well-known examples include Tridevi (Saraswati, Lakshmi, Kali), the Charites (Graces), the Horae (Seasons, of which there were three in the ancient Hellenistic reckoning), and the Moirai (Fates). Some deities generally depicted as singular also included triplicate aspects. In Stymphalos, Hera was worshiped as a Girl, a Grown-up, and a Widow.

Hecate is another example.

Some Christians might reject this comparison, a sort of knee-jerk response to anything that might appear critical of their faith. But there is a clear and obvious commonality. While Neopagans venerate the Goddess as Maiden, Mother, and Crone, Christians adopt a patriarchal version, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost/Spirit.

Does a triple God have particular effects on the faith that follows it/He/She/them?

The concept of The Trinity is extremely complex, and it was developed mainly in the Church, but with some Biblical basis. The idea of the unforgivable sin of 'blasphemy against the Holy Spirit' may be one of the most harsh aspects of the underlying aspects of the idea of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The best explanation of these which I came across was the idea of God as source, son as embodied action and Holy Spirit as the underlying force. However, there is so much at play, including the idea of the Holy Spirit, as a political aspect of the acceptance of the whole persuasion of the authority of 'truth' as in official doctrines of Christianity.

I was raised 'traditional' Roman Catholic — at the age of 8, I could recite most of the Mass, in Latin — so I am aware that Christian theologians long ago calculated how many Trinities may dance on the head of a pin. [I think the answer is "42"?]

I was trying to ask what you thought/think about the Christian deity as a triple God, like Hecate, or the Wiccan Goddess.

I am surprised that you could recite the entire Mass as I could never have done that. Fortunately, Mass was not recited in Latin when I was growing up so I did not have to worry about Latin, but I know that my parents did.

As far as the idea of the trinitarian idea of God, I don't think that the teachers focused on that too much and spoke more about the ideas of Christ as the Gospel of love, which was more helpful. Thinking about it now, there are parallels with other gods as having 3 aspects, such as in Wicca. Jung spoke a fair amount about the Trinity in his 'Answer to Job', suggesting that a quaternity was more consistent with the human psyche. He thought that the fourth aspect should incorporate the principle of evil/the feminine principle. This was in relation to both perfectionism and the patriarchal stance of Christianity.

Of course, some of the issues around the literal aspects of anthromorphism and Catholic or some other teachings have parallels in other pictures of gods, including the idea of a Virgin birth and the the idea of Osiris as the risen god.

[Stoppelmann]

Although Christianity is a constructive concept in the sense that it provides hope to the individual, it can quickly become a concept that is deconstructive as the constant search for answers can ultimately destabilise the tradition and cause a loss of faith. Instead of focusing on the how and constantly digging for deeper answers as us humans tend to do, we need to just accept the concepts of Christianity that are displayed before us. Sure, it is good to question things, but sometimes we need to have faith and not deconstruct everything to the point that all faith and imagination is diminished.

Although to a certain degree I agree that some criticism of Christianity is trivial, and I believe that we all need some direction, just accepting concepts is not what I would agree on. I also don't think that we should deconstruct everything, but when something is skewed, and things are going wrong because of it, we have to ask questions.

[Stoppelmann]

Jung spoke a fair amount about the Trinity in his 'Answer to Job', suggesting that a quaternity was more consistent with the human psyche. He thought that the fourth aspect should incorporate the principle of evil/the feminine principle. This was in relation to both perfectionism and the patriarchal stance of Christianity.

Jung explored the archetypal nature of triadic symbolism, which can be found in various religious and mythological systems, including the trinity in Christianity. Jung identified the archetype of the "Three" as having deep psychological significance. The triad is a common motif in myths and religions worldwide, and Jung believed it pointed to the psychological dynamics of integration and wholeness. The number three often symbolizes completion, balance, and in "Answer to Job" he also connects Yahweh's transformation and the embodiment of the divine in human form (Christ) as expressions of the divine's process of individuation and integration of opposites.

His interpretation of the Trinity highlights the transformation of Yahweh's character throughout the Book of Job. He observes that God evolves from an initially rather capricious and seemingly arbitrary deity to a more balanced and understanding figure, particularly in the latter part of the story. Jung sees the Trinity as a symbol that reflects psychological processes in the collective unconscious.

[Pattern-chaser]

Historically — i.e. the history of Christianity, not Judaism or anything else — Christianity did supersede Judaism, chronologically. And yes, this has surely been *a* motivator for discrimination since then, if not the only one. Humans can always find a reason to brand a person or community as "them" and not "us".

There is a difference though between following and superseding, isn’t there?

Oops! There is indeed. My mistake; I should've written "followed".

[JackDaydream]

I think this topic offers us the opportunity to consider Christianity...

One thing I forgot to mention in my previous post (above) was the Christian Trinity. The similarity to other 'triple Gods' rarely seems to be discussed.

Various triune or triple goddesses, or deities who appeared in groupings of three, were known to ancient religion. Well-known examples include Tridevi (Saraswati, Lakshmi, Kali), the Charites (Graces), the Horae (Seasons, of which there were three in the ancient Hellenistic reckoning), and the Moirai (Fates). Some deities generally depicted as singular also included triplicate aspects. In Stymphalos, Hera was worshiped as a Girl, a Grown-up, and a Widow.

Hecate is another example.

Some Christians might reject this comparison, a sort of knee-jerk response to anything that might appear critical of their faith. But there is a clear and obvious commonality. While Neopagans venerate the Goddess as Maiden. Mother and Crone, Christians adopt a patriarchal version, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost/Spirit.

Does a triple God have particular effects on the faith that follows it/He/She/them?

The concept of The Trinity is extremely complex, and it was developed mainly in the Church, but with some Biblical basis. The idea of the unforgivable sin of 'blasphemy against the Holy Spirit' may be one of the most harsh aspects of the underlying aspects of the idea of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The best explanation of these which I came across was the idea of God as source, son as embodied action and Holy Spirit as the underlying force. However, there is so much at play, including the idea of the Holy Spirit, as a political aspect of the acceptance of the whole persuasion of the authority of 'truth' as in official doctrines of Christianity.

The development of the Christian concept of the Trinity was a gradual process that took several centuries. The idea of the Trinity, as it is commonly understood today, emerged through theological debates, reflections, and clarifications during the early centuries of Christianity. It was an attempt to reconcile and articulate the relationship between God the Father, Jesus Christ (or the Son), and the Holy Spirit. So, you can see that it arose from a problem that some theologians had and not really a necessity, but the Council of Constantinople in 381 CE (!) finally clarified the divinity of the Holy Spirit and affirmed the full Triune nature of God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

The doctrine of the Trinity remains a central tenet of orthodox Christianity today, encompassing the belief in one God who exists as three distinct persons in a mysterious and unified relationship. A non-dualist belief would have no need of such a construct, because God is one and an ultimate unity of all things, which dissolves the boundaries between different entities or persons.

I haven't read much theology because it seems so much more insular than comparative religion or the philosophy of religion. I guess that the concept of the Trinity did emerge in such circles and was probably over a long period.

The aspect of unity between theology and philosophy which I have found interesting is the way in which Augustine drew upon Plato and Aquinas upon Aristotle, introducing Greek ideas into Christianity. Also, Neoplatonism , including the ideas of Plotinus, was probably a significant strand in Christian thinking. The idea of the 'One' as opposed to the 'three in one' of the Trinity may have been a dialogue.

[Stoppelmann]

I haven't read much theology because it seems so much more insular than comparative religion or the philosophy of religion. I guess that the concept of the Trinity did emerge in such circles and was probably over a long period.

The aspect of unity between theology and philosophy which I have found interesting is the way in which Augustine drew upon Plato and Aquinas upon Aristotle, introducing Greek ideas into Christianity. Also, Neoplatonism , including the ideas of Plotinus, was probably a significant strand in Christian thinking. The idea of the 'One' as opposed to the 'three in one' of the Trinity may have been a dialogue.

Augustine's integration of Neoplatonic ideas into Christianity had a significant impact on shaping Christian theology, and his understanding of God as the ultimate source of all being and the Good, he borrowed from Neoplatonism, which helped establish a more systematic and coherent theological framework. But his reflections on the Trinity were also influenced by Neoplatonic ideas of unity and multiplicity, leading to a more refined understanding of the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Even Augustine's view of creation was influenced by Neoplatonic concepts, particularly the idea of the divine emanating goodness and existence outwardly.

The interesting thing is, taken generally, there is an affinity to non-dualistic themes here. Neoplatonism is considered to be dualistic in nature, but its form of dualism is different from other philosophical dualistic systems. The dualistic aspect arises from the distinction between the transcendent, pure, and unified nature of The One and the multiplicity and imperfections of the lower levels (Nous and Soul) and the material world. The similarities with non-dualism lie in the goal to ascend the hierarchy through contemplation and philosophical practices to attain a higher awareness of reality and ultimately reunite with The One.

[Mlw]

The question of the existence of God was never relevant to the Christian faith. Wilfred Cantwell Smith (Belief and History, 1977) explains that the meaning of 'faith' was always to pledge heart and soul to the divine. Thus, we ought to commit ourselves to the Christian faith and live in loyalty with God. The crucifixion and resurrection of the Son of God is a matter of faith. It shall serve to rectify our corrupt nature which is curved in upon itself (incurvatio in se; Luther). Christian faith is a way of healing, and not so much a statement about the nature of the world. In Thomistic theology, the world runs its course by itself, only being upheld by God. This view is wholly compatible with science, because it does not intrude into the scientific domain.

[JackDaydream]

The question of the existence of God was never relevant to the Christian faith. Wilfred Cantwell Smith (Belief and History, 1977) explains that the meaning of 'faith' was always to pledge heart and soul to the divine. Thus, we ought to commit ourselves to the Christian faith and live in loyalty with God. The crucifixion and resurrection of the Son of God is a matter of faith. It shall serve to rectify our corrupt nature which is curved in upon itself (incurvatio in se; Luther). Christian faith is a way of healing, and not so much a statement about the nature of the world. In Thomistic theology, the world runs its course by itself, only being upheld by God. This view is wholly compatible with science, because it does not intrude into the scientific domain.

The issue of faith was important, but it may still come down to the issues of what was being argued for, especially in regard of the resurrection and what it stands for. In saying this, I am not wishing to dismiss the Christian perspective,, especially that something extraordinary took place . However, I am wondering how this may be understood symbolically, and in relation to science, as well as the idea of faith?

[JackDaydream]

The question of the existence of God was never relevant to the Christian faith. Wilfred Cantwell Smith (Belief and History, 1977) explains that the meaning of 'faith' was always to pledge heart and soul to the divine. Thus, we ought to commit ourselves to the Christian faith and live in loyalty with God. The crucifixion and resurrection of the Son of God is a matter of faith. It shall serve to rectify our corrupt nature which is curved in upon itself (incurvatio in se; Luther). Christian faith is a way of healing, and not so much a statement about the nature of the world. In Thomistic theology, the world runs its course by itself, only being upheld by God. This view is wholly compatible with science, because it does not intrude into the scientific domain.

I am writing another post because I see this area as so complex in trying to make sense of what may have happened in the resurrection and the matter of faith. There are a number of possibilities, including fabrications of who may have moved the stone and wishes to develop ideas of the 'resurrection'.

On the other hand, there is the question of science, especially materialism, as a variable in trying to understand the 'mystery' of the resurrection.From the standpoint of philosophy it may come down to the question of what it may mean for the idea of the 'body' of Jesus Christ to be risen. This would entail the idea of some higher power, or 'God', raising some 'body', as well as the question of what this 'body' may entail. It may be here that the question of materialism, or idealism and the symbolic interpretations of the themes of Christianity. How may the symbolic be regarded in the overall picture of human understanding?

[JackDaydream]

I haven't read much theology because it seems so much more insular than comparative religion or the philosophy of religion. I guess that the concept of the Trinity did emerge in such circles and was probably over a long period.

The aspect of unity between theology and philosophy which I have found interesting is the way in which Augustine drew upon Plato and Aquinas upon Aristotle, introducing Greek ideas into Christianity. Also, Neoplatonism , including the ideas of Plotinus, was probably a significant strand in Christian thinking. The idea of the 'One' as opposed to the 'three in one' of the Trinity may have been a dialogue.

Augustine's integration of Neoplatonic ideas into Christianity had a significant impact on shaping Christian theology, and his understanding of God as the ultimate source of all being and the Good, he borrowed from Neoplatonism, which helped establish a more systematic and coherent theological framework. But his reflections on the Trinity were also influenced by Neoplatonic ideas of unity and multiplicity, leading to a more refined understanding of the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Even Augustine's view of creation was influenced by Neoplatonic concepts, particularly the idea of the divine emanating goodness and existence outwardly.

The interesting thing is, taken generally, there is an affinity to non-dualistic themes here. Neoplatonism is considered to be dualistic in nature, but its form of dualism is different from other philosophical dualistic systems. The dualistic aspect arises from the distinction between the transcendent, pure, and unified nature of The One and the multiplicity and imperfections of the lower levels (Nous and Soul) and the material world. The similarities with non-dualism lie in the goal to ascend the hierarchy through contemplation and philosophical practices to attain a higher awareness of reality and ultimately reunite with The One.

I wonder how idea of The Trinity, as well as ideas about 'God' remain as symbolic representations, as 'hidden' aspects beyond the domains of materialism. Here, I am not wishing to undermine their importance, but aware that philosophies of materialism may see reality entirely in this way, as if human meanings are a mere addition created by human beings, as opposed to any transcendent reality. The question of as to whether there is any transcendent reality may be the essential dilemma underlying the main aspects of Christian philosophy.

[Stoppelmann]

I wonder how idea of The Trinity, as well as ideas about 'God' remain as symbolic representations, as 'hidden' aspects beyond the domains of materialism. Here, I am not wishing to undermine their importance, but aware that philosophies of materialism may see reality entirely in this way, as if human meanings are a mere addition created by human beings, as opposed to any transcendent reality. The question of as to whether there is any transcendent reality may be the essential dilemma underlying the main aspects of Christian philosophy.

By presenting God as a mystery and beyond human comprehension, many religious and philosophical traditions emphasize the limitations of human understanding and knowledge. This fosters humility and reverence toward the divine. We are also limited in our language, and so any attempt to define or fully describe the divine using finite human language would be inadequate and limiting. Symbolic representations, on the other hand, provide a way for individuals to approach the divine in a manner that transcends literal definitions.

Many religious and philosophical traditions assert that God exists beyond the material world and cannot be reduced to physical or observable phenomena. Other traditions compare our experience of God to the water in which fish swim, or the air in which birds fly. St. Paul says, “he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else,” and quotes a Greek ‘poet’ saying, “For in him we live and move and have our being.” As such, the idea of God remains symbolic and hidden from empirical investigation.

[Mlw]

I am writing another post because I see this area as so complex in trying to make sense of what may have happened in the resurrection and the matter of faith. There are a number of possibilities, including fabrications of who may have moved the stone and wishes to develop ideas of the 'resurrection'.

On the other hand, there is the question of science, especially materialism, as a variable in trying to understand the 'mystery' of the resurrection.From the standpoint of philosophy it may come down to the question of what it may mean for the idea of the 'body' of Jesus Christ to be risen. This would entail the idea of some higher power, or 'God', raising some 'body', as well as the question of what this 'body' may entail. It may be here that the question of materialism, or idealism and the symbolic interpretations of the themes of Christianity. How may the symbolic be regarded in the overall picture of human understanding?

I wrote this article long ago: "The real meaning of the motif of the dying god" (use your search engine). I think it says something of value, although it probably needs a revision.

According to science, we are made of carbon and water, and no soul substance exists. The illusion of an existing subject comes from brain neurons firing according to a habitual pattern. Nevertheless, we don't think for a minute that we are illusory subjects that lack true being. Although we know that we are only material, our faith in the personal soul is unbending. Evidently, knowledge is one thing, faith is another. Arguably, this soul faith is not less irrational than believing in a World Soul.

What would happen is we stopped believing in the ontic subject? Of course, nihilism would take over. People would be seen as disposable carbon-units, society would collapse, and humanity would soon become extinct. Many have expressed the fear that the demise of Christianity would set such a development in motion.

[Stoppelmann]

What would happen is we stopped believing in the ontic subject? Of course, nihilism would take over. People would be seen as disposable carbon-units, society would collapse, and humanity would soon become extinct. Many have expressed the fear that the demise of Christianity would set such a development in motion.

There are philosophical and spiritual traditions that either deny the existence of an ontic subject or propose alternative views on the nature of the self. These traditions often challenge the idea of a fixed, enduring self and suggest that the self is either an illusion or a dynamic, interconnected phenomenon.

In many Buddhist schools, the concept of "anatta" (Sanskrit: "anatman") is central. Anatta translates to "non-self" or "no-soul." Buddhism teaches that the belief in a permanent, unchanging self is a delusion that leads to suffering. According to this view, the self is not an ontic subject but an ever-changing, impermanent stream of thoughts, sensations, and experiences. Understanding and realizing the true nature of the self (or lack thereof) is considered essential for achieving enlightenment and liberation from suffering.

Advaita Vedanta also asserts the non-dual nature of reality. It posits that the ultimate reality (Brahman) is the only true existence, and the individual self (Atman) is an illusory identification with the body and mind. According to Advaita Vedanta, the apparent multiplicity of selves and objects is a result of ignorance (avidya) and realizing the oneness of all existence leads to spiritual liberation (moksha).

Some existentialist philosophers question the notion of a fixed, essential self and instead emphasize individual freedom, choice, and responsibility. Existentialists like Jean-Paul Sartre propose that existence precedes essence, meaning that individuals create their essence (identity) through their actions and choices. The self is not a fixed, predefined entity but is constantly shaped and defined by our decisions and commitments.

Even in Neuroscience and Cognitive Science, while not a specific tradition, scientific research in fields like neuroscience and cognitive science has raised questions about the nature of the self. Some studies suggest that the self is a construct of the brain and that the feeling of a unified self arises from the integration of various mental processes.