Is Trinity logical or not?

[Theo102]

I can refute it... but all you have done is repeated somebody else's error.

Do you think that the difference between the name of Shem Tob and Shem Tov is significant? If not, then what error have I posted?

 

[Ken Rank]

Do you think that the difference between the name of Shem Tob and Shem Tov is significant? If not, then what error have I posted?

The V and B difference only show you don't know the language so I know you are English only and at the mercy of translators and Strong's.

The doctrine of the Trinity was Christianity's attempt to force-fit monotheism into Elohism. There are many reasons why it's not a good theological description of deity, one of these is that there's no person of the trinity that has a female physical form as would be implied by Genesis 1:26-27.

And it is here (above) where you are wrong. You prove with this statement that you have literally no idea how the doctrine developed, which is why I suggested that book.

We have taken this far enough.

 

[Theo102]

The V and B difference only show you don't know the language so I know you are English only and at the mercy of translators and Strong's.

Non sequitur. The translators and Strong's get it wrong often enough to be a problem. The meaning of the V & B differences goes back to the Sefer Yetzirah.

"The doctrine of the Trinity was Christianity's attempt to force-fit monotheism into Elohism. "

And it is here (above) where you are wrong. You prove with this statement that you have literally no idea how the doctrine developed, which is why I suggested that book.

Another non sequitur. You are apparently unable to find anything relevant from your book to back up your argument.

 

[jayem]

If I were a believer, I could only be a Unitarian. Trinitarianism is--as Thomas Jefferson and his buddy Joseph Priestly (an English chemist and philosopher) believed--"mental insanity."

At least we don't burn trinity-deniers at the stake anymore.

The Murder of Michael Servetus

 

[Ken Rank]

If I were a believer, I could only be a Unitarian. Trinitarianism is--as Thomas Jefferson and his buddy Joseph Priestly (an English chemist and philosopher) believed--"mental insanity."

At least we don't burn trinity-deniers at the stake anymore.

The Murder of Michael Servetus

You're an atheist so I don't expect you to grasp this anyway because the bible, to you, is a joke. But for somebody like @Theo102 it shouldn't be such a stretch. I can post hundreds, literally, hundreds of verses that prove Yeshua was God in the flesh. In fact, I can post so many verses and make so many connections that you'll stop reading because of time. But that's just it, time. I see it (time) as a precious gift from God and I won't spend it on anyone who only wants to argue and take shots at others. So Theo, it isn't that I don't have a response, it is that in my 20 years of forums, I know you are not serious about hearing anything outside of what you currently believe. You are not seeking any deeper truth as related to Yeshua's deity, you are fighting against it which means anything I say will fall on deaf ears so why waste the time? So you can take your little uppity reply of "non sequitur" and keep it with your assumption that I am clueless. I am fine with that.

Unwatching thread, moving on.

PS.... when you finally realize that you are just parroting the ideas of others and have done no study on your own, check that book out. I would even send you my copy if you promised to read it.

 

[Theo102]

So Theo, it isn't that I don't have a response, it is that in my 20 years of forums, I know you are not serious about hearing anything outside of what you currently believe. You are not seeking any deeper truth as related to Yeshua's deity, you are fighting against it which means anything I say will fall on deaf ears so why waste the time?

You don't know as much as say you do.

when you finally realize that you are just parroting the ideas of others and have done no study on your own

I'd seriously recommend that you see a therapist about your problem with projection. If your book had anything of value then you should have brought up the specifics before.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Frank Turek has a very good analogy on this.
He explains that we can never fully comprehend the nature of God but we can apprehend Him.
Like the ocean, you know it's there and it's vast but we can never fully know what is going on in its depths.

Except that you can send submarine drones into the ocean and map it all.
You can use satellites to map the ocean floor.
You can do all kind of things.

But more importantly: the ocean demonstrably exists.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Well who said its not supposed to be completely logical. God who gave us logic would not want us to use it to know him? What for did God give us logic?

Humans developed logic. Nobody gave it to us.

 

[Theo102]

Humans developed logic. Nobody gave it to us.

Humans are ignorant.

 

[Theo102]

Frank Turek has a very good analogy on this.
He explains that we can never fully comprehend the nature of God but we can apprehend Him.
Like the ocean, you know it's there and it's vast but we can never fully know what is going on in its depths.

If you argue for ignorance then that's what you get.

 

[Tayla]

Can we comprehend the understanding of trinity through logic or faith alone?

Since God is love, this implies (by logic and philosophy) that he has someone to love. Therefore, there are at least two persons of the Trinity. The Bible informs us that there are three.

 

[dzheremi]

I haven't read every reply here, but I would say that it is most obviously illogical, and that's not a bad thing. It just means it does not fit within the human-created categories by which we can prove or support our suppositions. Being 3-in-1 and 1-in-3 is not logical. Obviously 3 and 1 are different numbers, and it's difficult to comprehend how anything can be both at the same time.

But I would say that we can know what the Holy Spirit has enlightened us to know. Anything further than that is speculation, which may or may not venture further than it is wise to venture in talking about matters of God. This is why in the traditional churches we stick to the Creed of Nicaea-Constantinople as what we can affirm about God without a doubt. Everything else may be enlightening in whatever way, but we only need to positively affirm that. In Arabic we call it "the law of faith" (qanun el iman), which I think sums it up pretty well. You can debate a law and call it illogical all you want, but at the end of the day, it's still going to be a law. Like gravity or the conservation of motion or something like that (not like "no drinking on the sidewalk" or whatever). It just is. I think that was one of the points HH St. Athanasius the Apostolic made to his letter to Serapion on the Holy Trinity (which I can't find online right now, or else I'd link it here), where HH starts off by saying something like "Foolish men pry too much into the workings of God; you say you believe in the Holy Trinity, so is that not enough to know and believe?" (very liberally paraphrased; the point being -- and this is usually the point in Egyptian Christianity, I have found -- that to believe is in itself enough, whether or not we are intellectually satisfied in the details; as St. Anthony the Great, the Father of Monks, said regarding a brother's correct answer to a question about the scriptures, "Abba Joseph (or whichever Abba it was; my books are in storage, so I can't look it up) has answered correctly, because he said 'I do so, not understand.'")

We worship the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit + not because it is most logical to do so, but because this is the revelation of God to us, and so this is how we must worship Him in order to worship Him in spirit and in truth, as our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ said that the Father is seeking such worship. So to do otherwise is to betray God.

 

[Theo102]

Since God is love, this implies (by logic and philosophy) that he has someone to love. Therefore, there are at least two persons of the Trinity. The Bible informs us that there are three.

YHWH doesn't care about persons. Deu 10:17. You are misreading the Bible.

 

[Theo102]

I haven't read every reply here, but I would say that it is most obviously illogical, and that's not a bad thing. It just means it does not fit within the human-created categories

It's a bad thing because without logic you have no way to distinguish between false inferences and true ones. The doctrine of the trinity is illogical because it is inconsistent with the facts, eg Genesis 1:26-27.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Humans are ignorant.

Some certainly are...

 

[Theo102]

Some certainly are...

They're ignorant of the broken humanist security model.

 

[DogmaHunter]

They're ignorant of the broken humanist security model.

You mean the one that basically trippled life expectancy?

 

[Theo102]

You mean the one that basically trippled life expectancy?

For the predators, but not for the prey.

 

[DogmaHunter]

For the predators, but not for the prey.

Actually, for the vast majority of people.

 

[Theo102]

Actually, for the vast majority of people.

Marginalizing victims is typical for the predator culture.