Orthodox and American mainstream Christianity believe in God as a trinity. I can accept and use such a perspective too. Here's how I understand God as a trinity.
God "the Father" is to me the source of all nature. This idea matches up well with the traditional concept of God as creator of the universe. Another way to put it is that God the Father is the wellspring of existence.
I do not believe that God creates people or anything within the universe by design. I believe he can be said to have created the universe itself, and could be seen as one and the same as all of existence. I'm OK with God standing in for "where the natural universe and all of existence came from" even though I am technically agnostic about any properties that source might have. So if someone were to ask me "Where'd the Big Bang come from?" I'm OK answering with "God".
To me God the Father does not have personal attributes such as a will, intentions, desire, anger, or judgment. Nor does he possess properties like omniscience, omnipresence, or omnipotence in a personal sense. Rather these properties apply in his being existence itself in its totality. For example, to me God is not omni-present except in that he is everything and therefore must be everywhere. Thus I'm comfortable with thinking of God the Father as "the sum total of all existence fully manifest", yet of course such a thing is unknowable to any finite being. It's also in this sense that God might be understood to say "I am that I am." God the Father represents an identity with existence itself, rather than a being within existence which has certain supernatural properties.
I see people get into conceptual trouble when they anthropomorphize this aspect of God to assert things like "God's word is true" or "God's will". I am also reluctant to use a personal pronoun like "he" to represent God, but I do so simply to adhere to the convention that most people use and to avoid what some see as a denigration by referring to God as "it". I certainly do not believe that God the Father has a gender except possibly in the most abstract figurative sense.
God "the Son" is to me the essence of self incarnate, that is God personified in sentient living form. This form of God can be found expressed in Jesus (assuming he was a real man, which I can accept but not prove), but is also found in every living thing to varying degrees. There's a general consensus that humans have "souls", and to me this means that humans are complex enough in their self-hood as to be conscious, self-reflective, and sentient. For me any living thing with a soul expresses selfhood, and therefore represents and embodies God "the Son" and is a "child of God". Jesus said "I am the first of many brethren." "First" here does not mean chronologically, but rather as the conceptual source. This aspect of God is entirely personal. Through sentient living things, God takes on personal attributes such as will, intention, desire, and opinion. If I wanted to draw a circle around the entire "Son", I would need to circle all the souls that ever lived or ever will live. Each individual person is to me an expression of this personal God, and thereby an example of divinity incarnated. Each person is a part, but a fully integrated part, of the source of self. The source of self I see as God the Father. This is how it is that we are all sons of God, for the source of us is nature, the source which is God the Father. We grow out of the universe (or existence) through a process of deep natural derivation. Thus we have an organic connection with God the Father as does Jesus. It's in this "Son" concept that I also see that we are "made in the image of God". I believe that every person is divine and should be treated with the respect of their divinity. This is why I like the greeting "namaste" because it is a salute which recognizes co-divinity and therefore implies "You and I are siblings as sons of God, co-partakers in sentient life, conspirators in living."
God "the Holy Spirit" is to me that which we divine in all of existence as the aggregate essence or direction of all Nature. It is the "progressive" aspect or guiding "force" of how existence unfolds in time.
The reason this aspect of God is referred to as the Comforter is because it's something we can see in action around us in history and in the present and its progressive aspect helps dispel anxiety. We can learn to see this "engine of good" everywhere. We can see how things develop to higher orders of complexity and deeper degrees of meaning. We can see how new forms emerge all the time and each represents an instance of continuing creation through derivation, proceeding in the present.
To me this spirit is evident in every aspect of existence, from that which entangles quarks to make atomic nuclei to that which makes a living thing "alive". It's also what animates people at their best as they undertake deeds which support life's purposes and alleviate suffering. Evolution itself can be seen as a facet of the Holy Spirit.
It's "holy" in that it deserves the respect and awe of anything which is indomitable and held precious and sacred. If we respect and align ourselves with this spirit, then we will further life and be at peace with the revelation of all things. Without it we might see the world proceeding randomly or meaninglessly with nothing to show for all its pains of becoming.
The reason "spirit" is an appropriate word here is because seeing this aspect of God in the world takes a degree of sincere and deep interpretation. It requires a degree of wisdom and discernment to "see" the spirit move, and even more to align oneself with it.
The Holy Spirit can be said to guide me and all living things to and through their growth processes. I believe the Holy Spirit works through all aspects of existence, and especially powerfully through people. Thus I grow best in the presence of love I receive from other people.
The Holy Spirit is to me quite analogous with the Tao. In fact, I could probably use them interchangeably and would use that alignment to help find bridges of understanding between eastern and western philosophies.
Comments [Hide comments/form]
Add a comment to this page: