I was wondering lately about the symbolism behind the Holy Trinity? I mean, what is the significance of a deity that is made of three parts and at the same time is one? Also, how did the idea of the Trinity evolve in history?
Note that I am an atheist, so I am not interested in the Christian point of view. I am more interested in the historical/theological aspects of the Trinity.
One idea to think about: a triangle is the smallest polygon.
Well, there is the Maid, the Mother, and the Crone, representing growth and birth, nurture and love, and wisdom and death respectively. Usually they are represented by the phases of the moon - the waxing moon for the Maid, the full moon for the Mother, and the waning moon for the Crone.
In some traditions, they can also be represented by the seasons - spring, summer, fall. Winter and the new moon are death. Less popular, but related (as the God and Godess are a unit, not seperate) are the Lad, the Man, and the Patriarch, representing virility, protection, and leaderships and the like. This is often symbolized as the path of Sol - Morning, Noon, and Evening, and Spring, Summer, and Fall. Again, death is part of the cycle. In some traditions, the Lad slays the Patriarch each spring as life is reborn.
We also have the Threefold Law, which varies:
Ever Mind The Rule Of Three
Three Times Your Acts Return To Thee
This Lesson Well, Thou Must Learn
Thou Only Gets What Thee Dost Earn
It is NOT karmic law, which in itself is vastly misunderstood.
Ooops, did I get some pagan in your Christianity? Sorry! 
Or did we get Christianity in your Paganism?
HEY! It’s a great taste treat!
From our view as creations of God, the Father is Transcendent (above & beyond Creation), the Son is incarnate (become part of the Creation as the man Jesus), and the Spirit is imminent (indwelling the Creation- both generally as all Creation is a reflection of God and specifically as all true Christians are begotten by God in the Spirit). Now, that is called the economic & modalist view of the Trinity (the three ways God relates to Creation). Catholicism, Orthodoxy & Reformation Churches all agree in the essential & ontological view of the Trinity (the relation of God within His own Being)- God as Eternal Mind/Father, eternally begets God as Eternal Word/Son, and They eternally produce God as Eternal Love/Spirit. That is the Catholic & mainly Reformed explanation, the Orthodox differ is that they hold that the Spirit/Love eternally comes from the Father to the Son rather than from the eternal interaction of Father & Son (some Reformed C’tians lean to this position tho the main Reformed Churches adopt the Catholic view).
Huh?
Why does the bible not only not support this rather convoluted and confusing explanation, but seem to contradict it?
Zagadka said:
Friar Ted responded:
IMHO Zagadka has it right here. There is much more complelling evidence to suggest that Christianity has been influenced by paganism (as it relates to the Trinity) than any paganistic belief in Triune Gods being derived from biblical teachings.
When did the concept of the Trinity begin? As far as I know, there is no mention of the Trinity in Old Testament. Is it a New Testament thing?
Nope, not in the NT either…
“And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him. And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Matt. 3:16 - 17.
But FriarTed, you are ignoring the post-structuralist dialectical ramifications of the metempsychosis-fixated autochthonous noon blue apples.
But this is very far from making clear that the “Spirit of God” is a separate and equal person of a Trinity.
BrainGlutton beat me to the punch. This says *nothing, I mean nothing, to support the existence of the Trinity.
Going further, it identifies Jesus, not as the third head of a three headed God, but as “my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”
And this illustrates perfectly the flaw in basing one’s doctrine solely on the Bible. For one who presupposes the Trinity, this passage is a perfectly clear expression of it. For one who denies the Trinity, nothing in this passage will convince them to change their mind. I believe in the Trinity not because it is explicitly stated in the Bible but because the Church has always and everywhere taught it, and has expressed it in her scripture, her councils, her writings, her hymns, her icons, and in the witness of the countless saints and martyrs through the centuries that God is Trinity.
For the one who believes in the Triune God, the Bible is full of references to Him, from the opening verses of Genesis, to the three angels who visited Abraham and were addressed as one, to Daniel’s vision of the Ancient of Days, to the baptism of Christ, to His transfiguration, to the hymn of “Holy, holy, holy!” that is perpetually cried by the living creatures in Revelations.
Stupid malfunctiong KDE clipboard…
The quote in the above post should be:
How many Catholics does it take to screw in a light bulb?
Three! . . . But they’re really only one.
Ha ha! I’m not Catholic! 
Biblical passages used to support Triune God-
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning Elohim (Gods) (He) created the heavens and the earth. (Hebrew scholars may correct me but I believe the word ‘bara’/created is an act accomplished by a single being).
Gen 1: 26. And God (Elohim) said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
This much at least supports a plural element within a single Deity.
Now to the Gospel of John 1:
SO we have The God (the Father) and the Word who is also called God & participated in the creation (Arius, Jehovah Witnesses & the original Unitarians
taught the Word was a being created by God to be His Son & Companion in Creation, so that the Word/Son was in a sense Divine, but not Deity).
Then, there are passages referring to the Spirit as distinct from the Father & the Son, tho there is debate among Bible-believers as to if the Spirit is personal or not.
Bible (both testament) believers all agree there is God the Father, and in a sense, a Divine Son and a Divine Spirit- the debates are- are the latter two equally Deity with the former, are they eternal with the fomer, are they all distinctly personal? I believe Trinitarian theology best works out the paradox of One God, a Divine Creating Son & a Divine Creating Spirit, but I’m not gonna totally dismiss modalist, Arian & other theories as totally unBiblical.
What do you mean-the Trinity=God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Jesus was not merely the Son of God, (according to Scriptures), but he WAS God. God the Son.
Otherwise, you’re getting into the Arian heresy.
And how exactly did ‘the Threefold Law’ influence Christian ideas about the Trinity when the concept was completely unknown before Gwen Thompson mentioned it in her Wiccan Rede first published in 1975?
The whole Maid-Mother-Crone idea isn’t that much older either, which isn’t to say that there aren’t some vague similarities with bits of some of the myriad forms of religion from the ancient world.
Catholicism is the faith that most prominently espouses belief in the Trinity. In looking for a scriptural basis for this, however, one must not forget that Catholicism often holds “tradition” as equivalent to scripture in explaining tenets of the faith. There is, for example, no scriptural basis (that I’m aware of) for the priestly vow of chastity. In fact, Peter, thought of as the first pope, was married. Likewise, there is no scriptural ban on women participating fully in the priesthood. The Catholic Church’s views on both issues derive entirely from tradition. Someone better versed in scripture may shoot me down on both of these examples, but I know others can be invoked that are more water-tight.
As to how the doctrine of the Trinity developed, I would venture to guess that it was formalized as a response to the rise of competing theologies. The history of the early Church is filled with factions splitting off due to opposing interpretations of particular issues. As the centralized Church became more powerful, it began clamping down on these other sects, labeling them as heretical. An untold number of people died, for example, because they chose to believe that The Son was entirely created by The Father, rather than “one in being” with The Father. I suspect, therefore, that the idea of the Trinity was set in stone around the time that the Nicean Creed was adopted as the official statement of Christian belief.