Who Were the Sea Peoples?

Hegel partially solved the problem of the relationship of the forms and their particulars with the idea of the " concrete universal ." As Collingwood expressed this, the universal is only the universal of its particulars. But even with this, we are only two-thirds of the way there. The concrete universal as a static entity is a dead thing. Its full meaning can only be realized by witnessing it unfold in time . And now we have arrived, again, at the Trinity (or the Trikaya ): the Father (Dharmakaya) is the universal, the Son (Sambhogakāya) the concrete, and the Holy Spirit (Nirmāṇakāya), proceeding from the Father and the Son, unfolds the concrete universal in time. And this is why, contra Strauss, their is no opposition between Reason and Revelation. Revelation shows us truths that naked reason would never discern, but which, once revealed, are correctly understood as supra -rational, rather than ir rational.

"It seems that for Tolkien, the creation is envisaged in three stages—music, light, and being—corresponding in some way to the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. Yet the whole Trinity is involved in every stage, and the Logos or Word, who is the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, can justly be called the order, harmony and meaning of the cosmos, revealed to the Angels but only expressed in creation through the Breath of God." -- Christopher Morrissey, " The Six Days of Creation: Tolkien’s Account ," quoting Stratford Caldecott

I have sometimes had commenters remark that my metaphysical interpretations of the Trinity surely must be completely novel, and have nothing to do with any traditional idea about it. Well, here is Ettienne Gilson, commenting on St. Bonaventure 's ideas on the Trinity, from about 800 years ago: "Now, it is clear that within such a substance [as a necessary being] the origin holds the place of principle; the exemplar, of means; the final cause, as its name indicates, of end; and as it likewise appears that the Father is the Principle and the Holy Spirit the End, it follows that the Son is the Means. Thus the Father is the original foundation, the Holy Spirit the completion, and the Son the mental word..." -- "The Spirit of St. Bonaventure" If we absorb the above, we can see that, for instance, Mises's work on praxeology has a trinitarian basis, even though he would have hated to have heard this!

"How can you worship a god who would send an innocent person, his own son, in fact, to suffer for the sins of others?" I've seen this one many, many times. It overlooks a belief of no minor importance: "one in being with the Father." Atheists may think the idea of the trinity is a load of nonsense, but they can't just ignore it and accuse Christians of believing something other than they do believe. The being crucified in the Christian story is God Himself. Once that is accepted, the complaint above evaporates like the morning dew.

"For every work [ or act ] of creation is threefold, an earthly trinity to match the heavenly. "First, [ not in time, but merely in order of enumeration ] there is the Creative Idea, passionless, timeless, beholding the whole work complete at once, the end in the beginning: and this is the image of the Father. "Second: there is the Creative Energy [ or Activity ] begotten of that idea, working in time from the beginning to the end, with sweat and passion, being incarnate in the bonds of matter: and this is the image of the Word. "Third: there is the Creative Power, the meaning of the work and its response in the lively soul: and this is the image of the indwelling Spirit. "And these three are one, each equally in itself the whole work, whereof none can exist without other: and this is the image of the Trinity. " -- Dorothy Sayers, The Mind of the Maker , p. 28