Metaphysics Paper
Mathew Mount
On the Metaphysic of Trinitarian Existence
By
Mathew Enoch Mount
Introduction
What is assumed to be true with the concept of the Trinity is that three persons that are distinctly different all consist of one god jointly. The centrality of Trinitarian investigations has been focused upon the person of Christ in who according to the Christian cannon of scripture and Athanasius based interpretation has appeared in person as both perfect god and perfect man with two natures that are not distinguishable as separate, consisting of both man and god, but all while both simultaneously exist as one substance. With Trinitarian study and experience, the other two persons of god are usually considered to be less revealed both as seen in nature and as seen in scripture with God the Father being almost unknowable and God the Holy Ghost being the working of God the Trinity closest to the personal experience of man. The focus of the following investigation will thus be to try to resolve some questions that arise about how the Trinity is both unified and exists in relation to time and space; moreover, the subject of free will and creation will be also considered as well as the basic nature of reality and transcendent experience of god.
Underlying Hermeneutics
The system of Hermeneutical interpretation that the following paper will utilize is called the Medieval Quadriga; moreover, the system is said to have been acquired from third century Alexandria.[1] I find however that the system of the Medieval Quadriga was actually based in the substance of the Jewish system of PRDS (PaRDeS); moreover, the following is said about PRDS in the most common generic public readings not to be understood as anything more than basic generally understood fundamental truth among some Jewish groups.
Lying behind some Hebraic hermeneutical approaches in the first century was a four-part layered method of interpreting Scripture. We find this in the teachings of Jesus, the apostles, in Rabbi Nahum of Gimzo and his disciple, Rabbi Akiba. These four layers to search out deeper meanings later were consolidated within Rabbinic Judaism to become a four-fold system known by the acronym PRDS (PaRDeS). …Phonetically written in Hebrew, PaRDeS spells the word “Paradise.” Rabbinic scholars said that when the four-fold meanings of a text are found, paradise is achieved.[2]
Since the Medieval Quadriga is basically the same system as PRDS, I will explain only PRDS instead of explaining both systems especially since the two systems are the same fundamentally with possibly only superficial differences; moreover, an attempt will also be made to explain the significance of the fourfold hermeneutical system comprising of four distinct types of interpretation named (PRDS) pashat, remez, d’rosh and sod.
The pashat interpretation of a text is the literal interpretation of a text; moreover, both catholic fans of the Medieval Quadriga and messianic fans of PRDS agree that the gospel of Matthew (as seen in the account of the genealogy of Christ)[3] is written to be interpreted in context of pashat or literal interpretation. The remez level of interpretation (also known as the allusion of a text) is considered to be found when a concealed level of interpretation (also known as allegory) is discovered by a so called “hint” being found that alludes to a deeper meaning than what is obviously literal; moreover, many people have agreed that the gospel of Mark is written to be best interpreted by remez. The drosh level of interpretation some people have said is the level of interpretation that a person gains by doing deep study into text and by developing major themes that bring together other uses of interpretation into a system; moreover, the gospel of Luke is considered to be best interpreted as drosh literature. Overall, lastly the sod level of interpretation is a interpretation that is said to be gained by the Holy Ghost revealing through scripture things that only could be revealed directly by god to man[4]; moreover, some have argued that the interpretation of the results of using systematically developed forms of the hermeneutic Hebrew system of Gematria[5] is best categorized as sod.
I am convinced that adopting a system of dividing all reality into PRDS based divisions presents an accurate model for transcendent assent into realms of the kingdom of heaven denoted by PRDS divisions. The concept behind such a transcendent assent would be that the mind of god is revealed by scripture so that man can obtain a union with god by ascending the kingdoms that the pashat, remez, d’rosh and sod levels of interpretation describe. Overall, such concepts lend themselves to Jewish Kabbalistic theology (reconciled briefly with the trinity below) that take decades of contemplation and rabbinical study to master correctly, so what would be enough for the following paper is the mention that PRDS based divisions are being utilized as underlying assumptions.
Dualism Verses Materialism
What dualism would appear to teach is the concept of humans having a dual substance with one substance being a soul/ spirit and another being physical. The concept of dualism can be corollary to the dual nature of Christ whereas Christ has a physical nature and a non-physical or spiritual nature whereas one refers to the godhood of Christ and the other refers to the manhood of Christ. With the concept of dualism, man can be seen to be made in the image and likeness of Christ specifically with two different ‘natures’ whereas one is spiritual and the other is physical.
The reason why physicalism can be seen to be such a difficult position to justify in the midst of Christianity and Trinitarian experience is because when the Christian cannon states that the sign of Jonah would be seen in the son of man in that the son of man would be in the center of the earth for three days and three nights[6] what is understood by a creedal orthodox interpretation of scripture in regard to the sign of Jonah is that Christ descended into hell during the time of the three days and three nights of his death. Note that while Christ was considered to be in Hell (Hades- the center of the earth) for three days and three nights his physical body was all the while present not in the center of the earth but instead on the surface of the earth. Overall, if such a separation of a non-physical and physical body occurred for Christ, then not only would he have two different substances but also Christ would be like an example for others who would also one day separate bodies (physical and non-physical) to be either one day reunited as one body or substance in the resurrection or to be eternally separated as two bodies.
If we are our bodies, then the only way that a burning hell could exist for us is if such occurred in our bodies or if our bodies are exposed to some type of tremendous heat. What is thus difficult to imagine is that a person could both believe in the concept of a burning hell and believe in the concept of physicalism. Since Christianity would endorse the concept of a burning hell what would thus appear to be the case is that Christianity could not also endorse the concept of physicalism teaching that a person’s existence is based upon the existence of their physical bodies.
Realism Verses Antirealism
What appears to be the case for the most part is that the position of the realist is that truth exists independent of a person’s experience. In other words for a Trinitarian the belief of the trinity does not arise from some social agreement that the trinity exists, but instead the trinity is considered to be existent because god who is independent of our experience has chosen to make himself revealed to our experience (thus the concept of the incarnation). What would appear to be the case is that those who believe in the realist perception could believe in a god namely the trinity that not only exists outside of our experience but also is an entity that we do not make or fashion; moreover, if we had made of fashioned the trinity we could not longer honestly believe that god is all powerful and all knowing because we who had fashioned the trinity would be greater than the trinity for truly nothing that man could endeavor to make could be grater than man and of all these things has anyone of them ever even been considered to be on par with man.
The position that an antirealist would thus be left with is a position that either we are all part of god jointly with each of us having no more divinity than any other, that no god exists, or that every person is a god separately; moreover, all of such positions have been historically rejected by Trinitarianism teaching a god that is not only separate from creation but also knowable by his creation namely us as humans. The reason why we could not all be part of god jointly is because people have wills that conflict between each other, and such would thus mean that god has a conflicted set of wills that would be so complex that the finial decisions of god would be the result of human conflicts. The problem of a antirealist believing that no god exists is that if we take the definition of god to mean the greatest imaginable force, then the question for an antirealist would thus not be if god exists or not but instead who god is because with such a definition if a plumber is noted to be the greatest imaginable force because he fixes a toilet for an antirealist then he becomes god until the time occurs that the roof needs fixed by a carpenter unless of course the antirealist believes himself or herself to be the greatest imaginable force and in such a case questions would thus arise as to if the antirealist would believe that other people exist independently of the imagination of the antirealist or not because after all the antirealist could have control over the earth to some extent but not nearly as much control over other people who many of could express dominion over the antirealist. The reason why we could not all be gods is because for us to all be gods a person would have to justify how an infant who can only eat, breath, and soil him or herself is the greatest imaginable force especially considering that the infant needs to be cared for by others who are greater than the infant, and the same would be true for employees in a business who depend upon a employer for a job while the employee would not be considered the greatest imaginable force but instead often the employer. Overall, antirealism fails miserably whenever the question of the existence of god is seriously considered.
For Trinitarian experience what could overall be said is that the existence of god cannot be the result of human imagination and social agreements as a theistic antirealist would be left to believe, but instead the subject of Trinitarian experience is that of describing a god that exists independent of our experience. If for example the early Christian movement was based upon endorsing antirealism, then what would have been more profitable socially and economically is for all the early Christians to just plainly accept the majority opinions that had been circulating instead of believing teachings that put the early Christians in jeperty of death and social condemnation. Overall, Trinitarian experience can clearly be said to be the subject of not truth that is generated by people as a social agreement but instead as truth that is worth dying for as seen as worth more than even human life as objective truth independent of our experience.
A Brief Reconciliation of the Trinity and the Kabbalah
In an attempt to present a reconciliation of Kabalistic understating of the nature of god with a Trinitarian understanding of the nature of god the following presents a Kabalistic Jewish interpretation of the guff (body) of god with the following description.
The Guf is an interesting concept, but in order to examine it, we must understand the nature of Elohim(God) or Adam Kadmon(Celestial Adam) and his 10 attributes or actions by which he created universes (There are 4 universes within Adam Kadmon who occupies the 5th concealed Universe). The sefirot or attributes/actions act as filters, garments or vessels for the infinite Light that fills them. They allow us to speak about Elohim's immanence in His creation, WHAT HE DOES(God Spoke 10 times/10 sayings/10 attributes in Genesis), without referring directly to WHAT HE IS (Which is impossible).Thus, when the Torah uses such expressions as God's eyes, God's ears, God's hand, it provides us with keys to understand his actions in creation or how He interacts with His world. The Sefirot, moreover, conceal the powerful radiation of His infinite light. By the way, this is a pure light which carries a divine force or is Spirit. John 4:24 states that Elohim is Spirit, and those who worship Him need to worship in spirit and truth. Finally, the ten sefirot are depicted in an anthropomorphic array. The higest attribute is keter(crown or cranium), followed by chochmah(Wisdom) and binah(understanding). These are referred to as the Mochin (Mentalities or Two Hemispheres of the Brain). The seven lower sefirot or attributes such as: gevurah (judgment/justice), chesed(mercy), tipheret(beauty), netzach(victory/endurance), hod (glory/praise/splendor), yesod(foundation), and malkhut(kingdom), are called "guf " (body).[7]
The above Kabalistic view would show scholarship that would support the idea of who god is in relation to the guff; moreover, the view would then focus upon god firstly but then suggest that by understanding the guff of god a person could understand our human patterning of god through the guff.
In the kabalistic tradition most kabalistic Jews will graphically depict the ten-sefirot tree of the kabbalah by drawing three main categories or columns with the three highest attributes of god at the top with one sefirot at the top of each column. With the concept of the trinity, a person could see the top three attributes (Mochin) of the tree as much like the three different characters of the three persons of the trinity (the Mochin are also called the intelligence of god) whereas the lower seven would be the body (guff) of theos (Elohim or God). Overall, the three columns of the ten-sefirot tree could then be grouped according to the fullness of each of the three persons of the trinity.
With kabalistic expression of the sefirot, one can consider that each of the lower seven sefirot of god may actually be archetypes (master molds) for forming reality into predictable patterns that represent or are an icon back to the body of god. The concept would be that seven of the attributes of god would be expressed plainly in the world for everyone to see and know god, however the three persons or characters of god would be hidden to the undiscerning. Overall, the concept would then be that god patterns all of creation in accordance to his body, so that all of creation would be able to understand who he is as seen in the scriptural reference to the incarnation, “The ox knows its owner, and the donkey its master's crib, but Israel does not know, my people do not understand."[8] As a result most, assumable is the case for the platonic archetypes existing in god and the nature of reality being a manifestation of the divine alterations of master molds composing god generating all of reality (as can be concluded from Platonic studies); moreover, we must not forget that before Aristotle fell from the truth to create Metaphysics to study the particulars Plato pointed to the heavens with the power of true academics in regard to the study of universally applicable truth that is what all of the particulars of Aristotle are known to point to. No matter how much Aristotle continues to make the church through his spirit look away from god through the writings of Saint Thomas Aquinas in the study of particular truths we continue to have a strong advocate in favor of universal truth in Saint Augustine as the subject of his study is what all the shadows and patterns point to while he is the strongest advocate for platonic thought since Plato.
The Subject of Freedom of Rational Beings
The question can be raised if we have freedom or not, and much of the subject of human freedom has been understood to depend upon the subject of determinism verses an indeterminism. Determinism has been known to teach that all of the actions that are made by humans are already unchangeable and have always been unchangeable for all of time whereas indeterminism has been known to teach that all actions made by man are not fixed through time but instead that humans have choices that can alter the future. Overall, the question of determinism verses indeterminism has been the subject of human freedom because if our actions are determined, then humans can not be free to choose actions that affect the future but if humans are not determined then humans can be free to make actions that affect the future.
Fatalism endorses the concept that humans have free choice to make decisions but that some outcomes are independent of human decision so that regardless of human decisions a person’s fait has always been determined. Although fatalism could favor intelligent design as the reason for fate, what can be generally agreed is that fatalism presents a god that does not know the future entirely because for god to know the future that would mean that the future is completely determined regardless of human freedom. The problem for Trinitarian experience with fatalism is the same for indeterminism in that god would be considered to either not know the future entirely or just plainly not exist.
What can be argued for Trinitarian experience is that god not only knows the future in ever detail but that god is the designer/ author, maintainer, and developer of the future and every action (thus the problem of radical evil). Now for god the father to be a designer or architect of creation that would mean that he would have a complete view of all actions present, past, and future, and for god the son to be a craftsman or maintainer that would mean that he would have to hold himself from complete knowledge in order to make decisions that are based upon just judgments because truly no just judge would condemn a person before his birth (example: Jesus states that he did not enter the world to condemn the world but rather to save the world through him, and how can this be the case if his view is that every action is already determined thus condemning people even before their birth). The person of the Holy Ghost thus becomes the power to complete the work of god regardless of any question of determination or decision of justice that god makes. Overall, the system thus presented in further studies shown below thus shows how the three persons of god can have all three perceptions of the nature of reality all while authoring reality and all while none have a greater dominating perception excluding even when taking into consideration the federal headship of god the father as like a first among equals; moreover, my argument is not for a determinism, indeterminism, or fatalism but instead by argument is for a three person god with each person co-equal and functioning differently as separate intelligent persons who have different perceptions of the nature of reality in concern to human freedom and determinism.
The Problem of Free Will and Predestination as Observed in Prophecy
A passage of scripture that promotes predestination states, “all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb that was slain.”[9] With the book of life that would record all those who presumably have eternal life being written to before the creation of the world, one could see clearly how Christian scripture would teach predestination because all those who had been chosen for eternal salvation had been chosen before the world was even created. In other words every person would be said to be predestined in their works, deeds, and destiny; moreover, the following reference sums the issue, “in him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will.”[10]
The same set of scripture that teaches predestination also teaches free will; moreover, the following is said about the freedom of Christ and people in general, “the one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his name out of the book of life.”[11] The reference to free will that is thus introduced is thus that both people are free to conquer as if the result of actions is not already known, and Christ is free to add and take away names from the book of life as a way of adding people to the destiny of heaven and taking people away from the destiny of heaven. Overall, one can see how Christian scripture teaches free will especially in respect to the person of Christ in who is said to be able to add and take away from the book of life as well as in people who according to their actions would be found to gain or lose favor with god.
The common understanding of predestination and free will would appear to be that the two views are incompatible; moreover, what is commonly thus thought is that since the two views are incompatible that predestination exists, free will exists, or the Christian scripture would be false for teaching both views. The remaining goal of the paper will thus be to show how predestination and free will both exist simultaneously all while the difference between the two perceptions is based in the differences in perception between God the Father and God the Son. Overall, the following investigation will demonstrate how both predestination and free will are both completely compatible views from the perception of God.
The Perception of Christ and God the Father
The classical pre-incarnation conception of god is that god is timeless in the way that god is outside of time and even outside of space; moreover, such would be true because both time and space would bind laws upon god that would make him change and be subject to an order that would be beyond his control; moreover, since the creationist view is that god created everything in creation the argument that can be posed is that god is an unmoved mover that sets everything in motion and creates everything in existence from a timeless and space-less existence because otherwise god would be subject to his creation. The question that can thus be posed is that if god is outside of time and space, then how god can interact with time and space while being so disconnected from both. Overall, classical pre-incarnation theology that shows a one person god as being outside of time and space ultimately presents a very impersonal god that cannot do anything inside of creation least he become subject to the laws of creation such as time and space.
With the concept of the Trinity however, God the Father joined substance with a human woman in producing God the Son of whom was subject to not only time and space but also ultimately to both man and death; moreover, the fact that god the son became bound by laws of nature demonstrates how God the Son would be able to make decisions that would be influenced by a perception bound by both time and space. The most notable evidence of the perception of free will among Christ is that of his own words saying, “…my father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.”[12] Overall, such a presentation of Christ would suggest that God the Father is the one person outside of time and space as an architect while God the Son is in both time and space as a master craftsman who maintains and creates all creation[13]; moreover, the place of the Holy Ghost would thus be to empower freely like in the case of little children that are directed like the Holy Ghost would be directed to work in the above prayer to either give the desired aid to Christ or to fulfill the plan for Christ to take the cup that was set for him.
A good example of what the perception would be of one who is bound by both time and space like Christ could be considered to be bound can be found in a poetic work that makes a case for a freedom of perception after the binding of time and space has been eliminated as the result of a bodily death, furthermore the poem is referenced below entitled Ocean’s sand: our maker and us.
As sand lines a beach,
water of ocean slowly carries some sand away to other beaches and places. While
a piece of sand moves by the will of the sea, the sand was once a rock and soon
will be too small to see. Life of sand starts as a rock and slowly does the will
of the sea until the sand is part of vastness of the ocean.
As we are
like rocks that sit on a beach, we can live a life that makes us become freer by
the winds of heaven and water of life from heaven's rain. When we are eroded to
become free of our rocklike bodies, then we can be part of the sea to the extent
that we can do the will of every wave. While we are part of the sea of our
maker, our life can know new creatures, explore new places, and be part of a
much larger body of will than that of the land.[14]
The work obviously presents a case of how man will gain a freedom from the binding of both time and space by limitations of location and instance slowly being removed until a complete unity is achieved with a timeless and space-less god regardless of a determinism that would be considered to make puppets out of men and slaves that can not even think freely; moreover, for Christ who is both perfect man and perfect god the reduction of his binding occurred from the time he was incarnated, was noted in scripture to occur at childhood with the passage “the child grew and became strong, filled with wisdom”[15], and reached a climax at the resurrection when not even death could have kept him bound.
The finial judgment that scripture speaks about would thus be administered by Christ who has free will without himself determining conclusions based upon reading from a predetermined result but instead by formulating the conclusions according to the results that God the Father has already known that Christ would make according to the plan of God the Father. The best example of scripture addressing the issue shows the following, “and I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done.”[16] Overall, the result of the issue appears to be that God the Father from the foundation of the world already anticipated, planed, and knew the decisions of Christ before Christ made his free will based decisions so that God the Father had or has a copy of the book of life since the beginning of creation that Christ will ultimately arrive at by the end of the world according to his own judgments made by wisdom.
Why Predestination and Free Will are both perfectly Compatible
With the classical view that both Christ and God the Father are coequal and perfect, as a result of their coequal perfection both their perceptions would be coequal and perfect as well as compatible since after all both views are from two different persons of the same god not to be in conflict. In other words if both the architect of a house and the master craftsman of a house are both perfect, then the architect of the house can perfectly predict and plan the end result of the construction of the house all while the master craftsman has perfect free will because by being a perfect master craftsman he can not help but produce a perfect house by wisdom no more than a perfect apple true can help but produce perfect apples. In such a model the person of the Holy Ghost would be the creative force like the little child or band of little children that do all the work for producing the house; moreover, in such a model the person of the Holy Ghost would also be like the power that produces the fruit of the apples in the example of the apple tree in such a way that the power is directed by the tree or Christ.
An example of the Trinity from nature can be the example of man that is made in the image and likeness of god[17]; moreover, man has three persons in one body that all partake of the same resources. The person of man that corresponds to God the Father in image and likeness is the person that does the overall planning and critical thinking without the desires of the flesh interfering, and the person of man that corresponds to God the Son in image and likeness is the person that does all the daily work and chores that eventually complete the overall plan and act as the insight for the critical thinking. Overall, the person of man that corresponds to God the Holy Ghost in image and likeness is the person that experiences reality as a child with simple desires and goals that present a person who is only interested in what is immediate and desirable by basic drives.
Predestination is overall a view of reality that is correct to assume for a person who designs creation with perfect knowledge of the end result of the design. Free will is overall a view of reality that is correct to assume for a person who creates and administers all existence for an end result that is ultimately after all his decision. The absence of both free will and predestination is overall perfect for a person that does not really care about designing or molding but instead cares about acting as the force that empowers. Overall, in the Trinity because the three persons have the qualities of perfect predestination in the case of the Father, free will in the case of the Son, and an absence of both in the case of the Holy Ghost all three persons together represent a perfectly compatible set of beliefs that are not confused.
Unity of the Trinity
The curtain around the arc of the covenant in the temple of Solomon is according to the Christian scripture the body of Christ[18], and the curtain was torn when the body of Christ was torn on the cross[19] (demonstrating a way for others to enter the most holy place)[20]. What was inside of the curtain was the arc of the covenant, and thus by our reasoning the arch was inside of the body of Christ; moreover, the arch had on top two cherubim[21] on the cover otherwise called the mercy seat[22] that god spoke at[23] god was considered to be enthroned[24]. For the sake of authority during the transconfiguration[25] Elisha and Moses can be said to have appeared before Christ because the two spirits that had rested upon or had been Elisha and Moses can be said to have been represented as the two cherubim of the arc of the covenant and the two olive trees that are spoken about in revelation[26]. Overall, the point to be thus made is that inside the arc of the covenant is something even more important for understanding the nature of god; moreover, what is inside of the arch is a perfect reference of the three persons of god in symbols of the law of Moses, staff that had budded, and the manna[27]
Now the manna is a representation of Christ because Christ himself is called the manna that came down from heaven[28], and the staff that had budded is a representation of the Holy Ghost because the staff is the staff of Aaron that budded and produced almonds[29] as can be seen to represent the testimony of god concerning the fruit of the Holy Ghost[30] being produced by Aaron being in Christ the vine[31]. Now the law can be seen to represent the father because the New Testament uses the phrase God’s law as if talking about the father and then Christ’s law as if talking about the son as a contrast of the two[32]; moreover, the most basic reason however that God the father would be represented by the law is that for Christ to be called the advocate[33] on our behalf and the fulfillment of the law[34] that must mean that a different jurisdiction must be the finial judge that the law is from (the father). Overall, the father, son, and Holy Ghost are all in one ark that represents one self while all three symbols are able to represent all three of the persons together in unity.
Specific Scriptural Problems of the Trinity Solved
Christ makes references such as those of the father and I are one[35] as well as if you have seen me, then you have seen the father[36], but scripture also states that the father and the son are distinctly different by saying that no one goes to the father except through the son (in the same section Jesus is considered the way to the father).[37] What appears to be the case is that just as the curtain around the Ark of the Covenant is considered to be the body of Christ while as discussed earlier the symbols of the trinity lay inside the curtain inside the ark, so as well what can be said is that the father was inside of the body of Christ.[38] The reference that scripture makes to God being one[39] is thus easily understood because the symbols of the trinity as seen in the Ark of the Covenant are together in one Ark and at one time could only be visited by a person (namely a high priest) going into the curtain (body of Christ) as symbolic of entering the body of Christ (entering the church)[40].
The question of who was Christ talking to when he spoke to the father from the cross[41] and the question of how Jesus could sit at the right hand of the father[42] can thus be reconciled by God being considered to be a three person self like the Arc of the Covenant is one thing with three symbols each of a person of God inside. In fact such a view is especially significant because the confession of Peter as to who Christ was[43] presents a case that Peter through the historical body of the son had been reveled by the father the subject of who the son was in person. Overall, what is obvious by now is that no conflict of scriptural verses can be found concerning how the father and son relate when the modal of the Ark of the Covenant is considered to represent the nature of god with the curtain around the ark being considered to be representative of the historical body of Christ.
Union with God
The menorah (seven golden lamp-stands)[44] was before the curtain in the temple of Solomon[45], and the menorah represents the spirits of god[46] (seven fold spirit) throughout the earth. What is notable to mention is that Christ the (son of David (who was the son of Jesse) by natural decent)[47] can be said to have been the offspring that the seven spirits of god rested upon[48] as symbolized by the menorah before the curtain (body of Christ) and the lamb of god[49] with seven horns and seven eyes[50]. The same symbolism would have been present during the destruction of Jericho when seven priests went before the Ark of the Covenant[51] with Israel along side the ark; moreover, in such a case the seven horns representing the breath or spirit of god went before the Ark representing the head of god or the lamb and the people represented the body or wife of the lamb[52] (the lamb being Christ). The seven priests with trumpets are symbols of the seven angels[53] that are presented in revelation as lights of the lamp stands (stars)[54] that represent the spirits of god (the menorah) because they all are presented as exiting the temple[55] just as the seven priests would have exited the temple with the Ark of the Convenient for the sake of judgment upon Jericho.
Scripture calls the bodies of the Christian believer each temples of god[56], and thus by a transcendent experience the temple of Solomon can be said to have symbols of things that can all be realized by the Christian looking within himself and seeing the realities of the things that the temple of Solomon could only symbolize. The Christian conception of subjects such as animal sacrifice thus involve subjects like presenting one’s self as a living sacrifice[57] at the temple of the body or using the temple of the body as the sacrifice, and likewise Christ interceding on our behalf as a high priest who offered one finial yearly sacrifice by sacrificing his own body[58] presents a change of practice from empirical truth and justification to transcendent truth and justification. Overall, Christian experience with the trinity became with New Testament Scripture transcendence based and rooted in the physical practices of the Jews.
Scripture notes that the reason why a man would leave his father and mother is for him to be united to his wife[59], and so Christ left his mother at the crucifixion[60] and left his father at the same time to make a decent into the underworld (called the sign of Jonah)[61]. The scripture also says that the two will become one because god seeks godly offspring[62], and so talking about the seed of god[63] makes reference to children of god[64] by such a union as the Lamb (Christ)[65] wedding the New Jerusalem (his chosen people)[66]. Overall, such union is all summarized in the prayer of Jesus that says that he prays for his people to be one and for them to be in him and him to be in them[67].
Every marriage then is a symbol of the reconciliation between god and man, and the fruit of the marriage is reproduction like in the Christian case of the fruit of the reconciliation between god and man producing offspring of other children of god. Everyday life would act as a model and a pattern for what occurs in heaven, and from this concept is what the opposition would gain the concept of spell casting. Overall, the end result of the topic of union with god would be that a person should seek to cling to Christ as a wife would cling to her husband, and at the same time to do what is pleasing to Christ in order to have actions that act as icons to bring others to the same bliss that is the act of making the children of god from the seed of god.
About the Subject of Truth
What is assumed above is that only god is truth for after all let god be true and every man dishonest. What is thus assumed is that god is the truth and that words, actions, and all other personal interactions with the world can act as either icons connecting and pointing to god (the truth) or as icons pointing away from god (dishonesty); moreover, the same can be said about Christ as the person of wisdom that man can not be wise but instead only he can be wise since he himself is wisdom but that man can have a relationship with wisdom. The result of such a subject would appear to be that apart from god no god exists, and thus apart from god no truth, beauty, wisdom, or even good exists and thus all of such things are only existent in god with something like shadows or resemblances in the world that act as icons that point to god and thus connect to god.
The point to be made is that only god is really true and real and that everything else apart from god is flawed and elusory. The point thus is that the substance of god is truth, love, and goodness, but that humans who are flawed and separate from god can only point to god and connect to him as icons of god for if humans had truth, love, goodness, and wisdom apart from god, then they would be gods lacking no need for god. Overall, the point is that god consists of the pure archetypes and the substance to generate all of existence as a pattern that like a shadow emanates and points back to god.
Conclusion
Ultimate reality is bound not by Predestination, free will, or a lack of either, but instead ultimate reality is bound by all three simultaneously without confusion and without division. Saying that everything in existence is predestined would be to favor one person of the trinity over the other two, and likewise for saying that everything has free will or that neither apply. Overall, what could be argued is that the only reason why the race of men views predestination and free will as being contrasting views against one another is because man is not perfect like god and because man is in sin.
To say that Christ was bound at birth and had his binding loosened little by little until one day he will be united fully with his people is to present a specific character of Christ, and to say that god the father is outside of time also presents a specific character of god the father. As can be seen by now, the characters of the persons of god determine the experience of the trinity. Overall, transcendence is the sum of such Trinitarian experience.
Biblography:
Martin, John
Subject: “Re: Guff”
E-mail May, 2, 2005 to Mathew Enoch Mount
Martin, John
Sacred Science of The Early Hebrews:
Quantitative Proof for Yeshua(Jesus)/Et Haor(The Light)=613
Morrisville: Lulu, 2005.
Mount, Mathew Enoch
Lover's Myth and Eternal Union
Excelsior Springs: Shadow Poetry, 2003.
Sproul, R. C.
The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version
Orlando: Ligonier Ministries, 2005.
[3] Matthew 1:1-17
[5] See Martin
[6] Matthew 12:40
[7] Martin, John (e-mail)
[8] Isaiah 1:3
[9] Revelation 13:8
[10] Ephesians 1:11
[11] Revelation 3:5
[12] Matthew 26:39
[13] Proverbs 8:30
[14] Mount
[15] Luke 2:40
[16] Revelation 20:12
[17] Genesis 1:26
[18] Hebrews 10:20
[19] Matthew 27:51
[20] Hebrews 10:19
[21] Exodus 25:18
[22] Exodus 25:22
[23] Numbers 7:89
[24] Psalm 80:1; Psalm 99:1
[25] Mark 9:4
[26] Revelation 11:3-5; Revelation 22:2
[27] Hebrews 9:4
[28] John 6:57-59
[29] Numbers 17:8
[30] Galatians 5:22
[31] John 15:1-2
[32] 1 Corinthians 9:21
[33] 1 John 2:1
[34] Matthew 5:17
[35] John 10:30
[36] John 14:9
[37] John 14:6
[38] John 14:11
[39] Deuteronomy 6:4
[40] 1 Corinthians 12:27
[41] Luke 23:34
[42] Matthew 26:64
[43] Matthew 16:15-17
[44] Exodus 25:31-32
[45] Exodus 26:35
[46] Revelation 4:5
[47] Matthew 1:5-6
[48] Isaiah 11:1-2
[49] John 1:36
[50] Revelation 5:6
[51] Joshua 6:13
[52] Revelation 21:9-10
[53] Revelation 8:2
[54] Revelation 1:20
[55] Revelation 15:6
[56] 1 Corinthians 6:19
[57] Romans 12:1
[58] Hebrews 7:27
[59] Genesis 2:23-24
[60] John 19:25-27
[61] Matthew 12:40
[62] Malachi 2:15
[63] Luke 8:11
[64] John 1:13
[65] Revelation 19:6-8
[66] Revelation 21:2
[67] John 17:19-21
Jim T
Jim (Buddy) T.
My Baby's Daddy 
That's Me__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com