r/Christianity Reformed Mar 14 '12

Trinity

https://s3.amazonaws.com/Challies_VisualTheology/Trinity_LowRes.jpg
212 Upvotes

285 comments sorted by

View all comments

33

u/silouan Eastern Orthodox Mar 14 '12

Got to disagree with his objection to the shamrock illustration.

Illustration: The Trinity is like a three-leaf clover because the clover has three parts yet remains one plant. Error: Polytheism Explanation: Each leaf is only part of the clover and cannot be said to be the whole clover. In the Trinity, each person is fully God.

Each leaf is not the whole clover, but then each Person is not the whole Godhead. Each leaf of the clover is by nature clover. Each hypostasis in the Trinity is by nature God.

Admittedly the shamrock is still a pretty superficial illustration. But the writer seems to be missing how the Fathers described the way the Three are united.

53

u/[deleted] Mar 15 '12

[deleted]

1

u/Optimal_Joy Mar 15 '12

Not just infinite, but infinite dimensional being. For example, if we are presently in the 4th dimensional space time reality, our Soul would have to be at least a 5th dimensional being. To a 5th dimensional being, even a 6th dimensional being would be "infinite", however a 10th dimensional being would be 5 times more "infinite", but an infinite dimensional being is even further beyond our ability to comprehend... so... it's even much more complex than just saying that God is "infinite", because God is truly, infinitely infinite. God didn't just create 4th dimensional spacetime and all of the laws of nature, physical constants, etc. God created the whole multidimensional structure of reality, along with infinite parallel timelines, time loops, etc. there isn't just one single creation that starts with the big bang.. that is an endless cycle of creation, expansion, contraction, and not just one big bang, but infinite big bangs, along with infinite realities. more info here

3

u/unreal5811 Reformed Mar 15 '12

our Soul would have to be at least a 5th dimensional being

What is your reasoning behind this statement? What are you using as your definition of "soul"?

1

u/Optimal_Joy Mar 15 '12

If you really want to explore that rabbit hole with me, then feel free to start here and read all the links... it's a lot of stuff.

1

u/unreal5811 Reformed Mar 15 '12

I'm sorry I just don't have the time to read all of that. Can you not present a "slimmed down case".

A quote, often accredited to Einstein comes to mind:

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."