Xref: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu soc.religion.christian:21772
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!rutgers!igor.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian
From: tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: MAJOR VIEWS OF THE TRINITY
Message-ID: <May.21.02.43.36.1993.4234@athos.rutgers.edu>
Date: 21 May 93 06:43:37 GMT
Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu
Organization: University of Georgia - UCNS
Lines: 30
Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu

In article <May.14.02.12.04.1993.25393@athos.rutgers.edu>,
swf@elsegundoca.ncr.com (Stan Friesen) wrote:
> 
> Simply put, I do not see any way that a "Platonic essence" could have
> any *real* existance.  "Essence" in the Platonic sense does not have
> any referent as far as I can tell - it is just an imaginary concept
> invented to provide an explanation for things better explained in
> other ways.

You are quite confident that essences do not exist.  How do propose to
define beings?  Can a thing can be *one* without definition?  Can a being
have a definition and know essence?

What about properties?  Do beings have properties?  Does God have
properties?

Does numbers exist in reality as abstract entities or do we invent them?

> Thus, to me, the unity of God must be primary, and the triality must be
> secondary, must be modal or aspectual (relating to roles, or to modes
> of interaction), since otherwise there is no meaning to saying God is one.

See my post in alt.messianic about the possibilities of tri-theism from a
phiolosophical point of view.
 
=====================
Ted Kalivoda (tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu)
Institute of Higher Education
University of Georgia
Athens, GA
