Answering modalism

[Paragon468]

A friend of mine wrote these two articles in an attempt to disprove the Blessed Trinity.

thelogicality.net/articles/god/the-illogic-of-the-trinity/
thelogicality.net/articles/god/unity-of-the-trinity/

Any rebuttals/comments?

 

[Michael57]

The Church has answered already.

The Athanasian Creed

1. Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith;
2. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.
3. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;
4. Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.
5. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.
6. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.
7. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.
8. The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated.
9. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.
10. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal.
11. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal.
12. As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensible, but one uncreated and one incomprehensible.
13. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty.
14. And yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty.
15. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God;
16. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.
17. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord;
18. And yet they are not three Lords but one Lord.
19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord;
20. So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords.
21. The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten.
22. The Son is of the Father alone; not made nor created, but begotten.
23. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
24. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits.
25. And in this Trinity none is afore or after another; none is greater or less than another.
26. But the whole three persons are coeternal, and coequal.
27. So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.
28. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.
29. Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
30. For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man.
31. God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and man of substance of His mother, born in the world.
32. Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.
33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.
34. Who, although He is God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ.
35. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of that manhood into God.
36. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person.
37. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ;
38. Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead;
39. He ascended into heaven, He sits on the right hand of the Father, God, Almighty;
40. From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
41. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies;
42. and shall give account of their own works.
43. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting and they that have done evil into everlasting fire.
44. This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved.

:tiphat:

 

[L_Marshall]

I’m too tired to formulate a rebuttal, but here are some comments that I get by glancing over your friend’s text:
When your friend talks about how there can not be more than one infinite God, he would do well to look at Aquinas’ theology of the substance of a thing. That may help reconcile him there.
He also seems to think that Christ’s divine nature, and His human nature must always work together, to the point of there being only one real nature. When he speaks of different personalities and applies them to Christ, he doesn’t account for this.

As I’ve said: I’m tired. These are the two things that popped into my mind.

Let mysteries be mysteries.

 

[yppop]

A friend of mine wrote these two articles in an attempt to disprove the Blessed Trinity.

thelogicality.net/articles/god/the-illogic-of-the-trinity/
thelogicality.net/articles/god/unity-of-the-trinity/

Any rebuttals/comments?

His argument is based on a false assumption when, in the first article, he wrote:

The first thing to be considered is that God is an infinite, transcendent being. By definition, there can only be one infinite being. The presence of one simply leaves no room for any others.

Your friend apparently is not familiar with the transfinite numbers (Cantor’s theory of infinity). God is infinite. There are plenty of infinities, an infinite number of them. Take the first one, aleph(0), that is the infinitude of rational numbers. There is an infinite number of even numbers, the same infinite number as all the rational numbers. This means, with the infinite, there are parts that are equal to the whole.

And this is only the first modality of infinity, the next, aleph(1), the infinitude of the real numbers, is equal to 2^ [aleph(0)], that is, 2 raised to the aleph (0) power. Aleph(0) can be removed from aleph(1) without changing aleph (1) one iota. In other words:

aleph(1) - aleph(0) = aleph(1)

What this means is that God chose merely to appear as three persons when he has the capability of creating an infinitude of persons from the one, whole, eternal substance. Ah, omnipotence, how can anyone argue against it, except out of ignorance?

Tell your friend if he is to discussed our Trinitarian God with any kind of intelligence, he should first understand the magnificent implication of Cantor’s set theory and the nature of the infinite. To say there is “no room” for another infinite being is just plain silly.

Yppop

 

[DanAl]

A friend of mine wrote these two articles in an attempt to disprove the Blessed Trinity.

thelogicality.net/articles/god/the-illogic-of-the-trinity/
thelogicality.net/articles/god/unity-of-the-trinity/

Any rebuttals/comments?

“The first thing to be considered is that God is an infinite, transcendent being. By definition, there can only be one infinite being. The presence of one simply leaves no room for any others.”

First, why can’t there two infinite beings that cooperate with each other? There’s nothing in the definition of God that precludes another infinite being so your friend is mistaken on this regard. Secondly if God can cause any effect, it is possible for him to create another infinite effect: the son. And if the son and the father can cooperate with each other and create any effect they want they can create another infinite being: the holy spirit.

I would urge you to notice how he says he has “obvious” and “simple” counter-arguments for the trinity, this is a huge red-flag. It’s saying that he knows something obvious that people a lot smarter than him missed before. Chances are that he’s no grasping the argument to begin with. And that seems to be indeed the case here.

 

[Linux]

His argument is based on a false assumption when, in the first article, he wrote:

Your friend apparently is not familiar with the transfinite numbers (Cantor’s theory of infinity). God is infinite. There are plenty of infinities, an infinite number of them. Take the first one, aleph(0), that is the infinitude of rational numbers. There is an infinite number of even numbers, the same infinite number as all the rational numbers. This means, with the infinite, there are parts that are equal to the whole.

And this is only the first modality of infinity, the next, aleph(1), the infinitude of the real numbers, is equal to 2^ [aleph(0)], that is, 2 raised to the aleph (0) power. Aleph(0) can be removed from aleph(1) without changing aleph (1) one iota. In other words:

aleph(1) - aleph(0) = aleph(1)

What this means is that God chose merely to appear as three persons when he has the capability of creating an infinitude of persons from the one, whole, eternal substance. Ah, omnipotence, how can anyone argue against it, except out of ignorance?

Tell your friend if he is to discussed our Trinitarian God with any kind of intelligence, he should first understand the magnificent implication of Cantor’s set theory and the nature of the infinite. To say there is “no room” for another infinite being is just plain silly.

Yppop

Your are assuming of course that the kind of infinities you are speaking of are or can be real entities and can compare to the concept of God’s infinity.

 

[Linux]

First, why can’t there two infinite beings that cooperate with each other? There’s nothing in the definition of God that precludes another infinite being so your friend is mistaken on this regard. Secondly if God can cause any effect, it is possible for him to create another infinite effect: the son. And if the son and the father can cooperate with each other and create any effect they want they can create another infinite being: the holy spirit.

I would urge you to notice how he says he has “obvious” and “simple” counter-arguments for the trinity, this is a huge red-flag. It’s saying that he knows something obvious that people a lot smarter than him missed before. Chances are that he’s no grasping the argument to begin with. And that seems to be indeed the case here.

Two infinite beings?

God is the fulness of being or perfection, so how can there be another being that is the fullness of being or perfection? If there were two it would imply that God lacks something the other being has, he would lack the particular instance of perfection that is expressed by the other being. In which case neither God or this other being would be the fullness of being or perfection.

 

[Linux]

Secondly if God can cause any effect, it is possible for him to create another infinite effect: the son. And if the son and the father can cooperate with each other and create any effect they want they can create another infinite being: the holy spirit.

So God creates a new infinite from nothing?

 

[yppop]

Your are assuming of course that the kind of infinities you are speaking of are or can be real entities and can compare to the concept of God’s infinity.

LIn

The “kind of infinities” I am talking about are entities, but they may not be real in a sense you may mean real? What do you mean by real? I can accept any one of the 4 modalities of real: objective, subjective, rational, and transcendent.

God’s transfinite number is at least aleph-1 and probably something like aleph-1^aleph-1

Only God is infinite; all else is finite.

God is infinitely divisible; can be divided an infinite number of times and still by infinitely infinite.

You should study up on infinity if you want to discuss God intelligently.

Not much of that around here.

Yppop

 

[Paragon468]

Two infinite beings?

God is the fulness of being or perfection, so how can there be another being that is the fullness of being or perfection? If there were two it would imply that God lacks something the other being has, he would lack the particular instance of perfection that is expressed by the other being. In which case neither God or this other being would be the fullness of being or perfection.

You seem to be mistaking Trinitarianism for polytheism.

The very fact THAT the Father is perfect leads us to the Son, and, in turn, the Holy Spirit.

 

[Linux]

You seem to be mistaking Trinitarianism for polytheism.

The very fact THAT the Father is perfect leads us to the Son, and, in turn, the Holy Spirit.

There is no mistaking the fact that the person i responded to spoke of God as two infinite beings co-operating.

Secondly, i accept the Trinity, i just don’t accept some of the arguments that are being touted as proof of the logical consistency of the trinity. Just like i don’t accept yours, if what you have said here can be considered an argument at all.

 

[DanAl]

Two infinite beings?

God is the fulness of being or perfection, so how can there be another being that is the fullness of being or perfection? If there were two it would imply that God lacks something the other being has, he would lack the particular instance of perfection that is expressed by the other being. In which case neither God or this other being would be the fullness of being or perfection.

Arguments for divine unicity only work when speaking of different gods, your’re missing the point. Notice that I am not speaking of actually distinct beings or three gods, I am speaking of the persons of the trinity, which are God, and how they proceed from each other.

 

[Linux]

First, why can’t there **two infinite beings **that cooperate with each other? There’s nothing in the definition of God that precludes another infinite being so your friend is mistaken on this regard.

You did not say here one being with 3 persons.

And then you went on to say that God can create an infinite effect. What does that mean? because i am assuming that you think God can create a whole new infinite act of existence. Which is wrong for the reasons i stated in my first post to you.

 

[DanAl]

You did not say here one being with 3 persons.

I was talking of the trinity, or to be more specific, I had the son in mind when I wrote my post. Notice that I do not endorse the possibility of distinct infinite beings that cooperate with each other because that would lead to over-determinism in their actions.

And then you went on to say that God can create an infinite effect. What does that mean? because i am assuming that you think God can create a whole new infinite act of existence. Which is wrong for the reasons i stated in my first post to you.

The persons of the trinity were not created ex-nihilo. The father is logically (not temporally) prior to the son, and the holy spirit posterior to the father and the son. Your argument for divine unicity misses the point: the persons of the trinity are formally distinct from each other, in other words they are distinct but inseparable from each other. Furthermore, the son proceeds from the father’s love of himself, It is a mirror image of the father distinguished by its relation to the father. Something analogous happens to the holy spirit.

 

[yppop]

You did not say here one being with 3 persons.

And then you went on to say that God can create an infinite effect. What does that mean? because i am assuming that you think God can create a whole new infinite act of existence. Which is wrong for the reasons i stated in my first post to you.

Linux
You are wrong for the reason I stated in my first post to you.
Yppop

 

[DanAl]

You did not say here one being with 3 persons.

And then you went on to say that God can create an infinite effect. What does that mean? because i am assuming that you think God can create a whole new infinite act of existence. Which is wrong for the reasons i stated in my first post to you.

To clarify the previous post. Arguments for divine unicity try to show the impossibility of two or more *completely distinct infinite beings.I am speaking of something else, the trinity. All persons of the trinity are equally God, but are distinct from each other due their relations: the son proceeds from the father and the holy spirit proceeds *from the father and the son.