Trinity -sophistry?

[enprever]

Firstly, "tri-theism" is just a heterodox as modalism as it would indicate belief in three gods, rather than one God. Trinitarianism is strict monotheism.

Secondly, the problem of the word "person" goes back to antiquity. When Greek-speaking theologians used the word "hypostasis" the Western, Latin-speaking theologians rendered it as the Latin "persona" from which we Anglophones use the word "person". The use of the Latin "persona" was troublesome for exactly the reason you mention, which is why Latin theologians had to carefully define "persona" as corresponding to the Greek "hypostasis". "Hypostasis" doesn't mean "person" or "persona", not really, but rather addresses a fundamental reality of a thing, in this sense it speaks of (for example) the Father's Father-ness.

You will note that I have a tendency to use the word hypostasis and hypostases (the plural form) rather than "person" and "persons". That's because I think the word "person" carries entirely too much baggage that confuses rather than helps understanding Trinitarian thought. The use of "hypostasis" is taken directly from the ancient Church Fathers and is clearly defined theologically and does not carry presuppositional baggage.

-CryptoLutheran

It's not "strict monotheism" because you have THREE persons which "should" be seen as three gods. But it isn't to avoid polytheism. This is why so many find trinitarianism to be illogical and cannot understand it. Judaism and Islam has "strict monotheism". One God - NO divisions or other forms. Just one indivisible God.

I think it's a big silly to start giving multiple divine beings "Father-ness" or "God-ness". Either something is God or it is not. Judaism says, "Hear O Israel - the Lord our God is One." How that equals three, I do not know.

The fact that theologians have to play word gymnastics just to try and squeeze some form of meaning out of these terms which do not make logical sense and no layman could understand anyway just shows the implausibility of it all.

 

[ViaCrucis]

It's not "strict monotheism" because you have THREE persons which "should" be seen as three gods.

One God. Therefore monotheism.

But it isn't to avoid polytheism. This is why so many find trinitarianism to be illogical and cannot understand it. Judaism and Islam has "strict monotheism". One God - NO divisions or other forms. Just one indivisible God.

If you had read my previous posts you'd see that I very clearly stated that Trinitarianism posits that God is one, without divisions, forms and is indivisible.

I think it's a big silly to start giving multiple divine beings "Father-ness" or "God-ness". Either something is God or it is not. Judaism says, "Hear O Israel - the Lord our God is One." How that equals three, I do not know.

The fact that theologians have to play word gymnastics just to try and squeeze some form of meaning out of these terms which do not make logical sense and no layman could understand anyway just shows the implausibility of it all.

You seem to continue to have some confusion over the subject matter, if you have questions I'd be more than willing to answer you and help you understand these things better as far as I am able. It's really no trouble at all.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[AskTheFamily]

One God.

You worship Jesus. You worship the Father. The father is not Jesus and Jesus is not the father. That already makes two Gods even if you like to call them both God and sometimes one of them as son of God instead of God. Of course trinity to me it's just trying to escape this with sophistry - to worship Jesus and the Father - but at the same time remain monotheistic - to worship both Jesus and the Father and claim their is only God. It's a contradiction, and trinity is really result sophistry to solve this issue. I already showed why in the opening post, that all the statements made for trinity cannot be true.

 

[ViaCrucis]

You worship Jesus. You worship the Father. The father is not Jesus and Jesus is not the father. That already makes two Gods even if you like to call them both God and sometimes one of them as son of God instead of God. Of course trinity to me it's just trying to escape this with sophistry - to worship Jesus and the Father - but at the same time remain monotheistic - to worship both Jesus and the Father and claim their is only God. It's a contradiction, and trinity is really result sophistry to solve this issue. I already showed why in the opening post, that all the statements made for trinity cannot be true.

And I think if you would be willing to see what Trinitarianism says and what it means you'd find that it's not all that difficult and that we're not just playing word games.

Yes, it is more complex than simple unitarian views of God, but it is still monotheism. We believe in only one God.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[razeontherock]

It's not "strict monotheism" because you have THREE persons which "should" be seen as three gods.

WHAT?!?? This has been rejected, in the harshest of ways. You have nothing to base this on but your own bluster, and it is still rejected.

 

[razeontherock]

sometimes one of them as son of God instead of God.

There is no "instead." I realize you do not understand this, nor what is being said. That is still not sufficient reason to go making baseless claims or accusations.