Dogmas of the church and uncertainty

[WannabeSaint]

I have a question regarding the infallibility of dogmas.

A dogma is an infallible truth that is absolutely true and cannot be willfully denied. Yet some dogmas like the Trinity are admitted to be a matter of faith and can’t be known through logical axioms.

Since the Trinity relies on faith, but is still declared an infallible dogma, would that mean the church is saying “The Trinity is absolutely true, but there is a chance that it is not true.” ?

Thus, a contradiction in it’s declaration?

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

Since the Trinity relies on faith, but is still declared an infallible dogma, would that mean the church is saying “The Trinity is absolutely true, but there is a chance that it is not true.” ?

No. Faith is not “We believe based on possibility that this is true.” It’s “We believe those who have told us this is true.” The Holy Spirit has been revealed to us by Christ and the Church itself, and our faith is in them that they did not mislead us. There is no chance that it’s wrong.

 

[Genesis315]

Faith is believing what God has revealed based on the authority of the revealer (ie based on God’s authority). Since God is the very author of truth, divine faith is the highest certainty.

 

[kapp19]

Revelation is not a theory about God, it’s what God Himself says, and He doesn’t lie and is never wrong. This is the fundamental principle of faith.

 

[Gorgias]

Yet some dogmas like the Trinity are admitted to be a matter of faith and can’t be known through logical axioms.

Since the Trinity relies on faith, but is still declared an infallible dogma, would that mean the church is saying “The Trinity is absolutely true, but there is a chance that it is not true.” ?

You seem to be equating ‘faith’ with “something that cannot be known.” Or, at the very least, that knowledge requires ‘logical axioms.’ Neither of these seem to be solid assumptions.

 

[AlNg]

Neither of these seem to be solid assumptions.

Is there a form of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle which would apply to a theological teaching?

 

[fhansen]

Many such truths are supernatural, beyond reason’s ability to comprehend. Grace is required. That’s all she’s saying.

 

[1ke]

would that mean the church is saying “The Trinity is absolutely true, but there is a chance that it is not true.” ?

No.

What the Church is saying is that the Trinity is absolutely true, even if you cannot fully comprehend it.

 

[Gorgias]

Is there a form of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle which would apply to a theological teaching?

“You can know that a doctrine exists, or you can know the content of a theological assertion, but not both”?

 

[AlNg]

“You can know that a doctrine exists, or you can know the content of a theological assertion, but not both”?

And the uncertainty principle would come in because the more certain you are of one, the less certain you are of the other.

 

[Gorgias]

And the uncertainty principle would come in because the more certain you are of one, the less certain you are of the other.

Ahh, but only if it were on the quantum scale, and not the macro scale…

 

[jochoa]

Yet some dogmas like the Trinity are admitted to be a matter of faith and can’t be known through logical axioms.

I think you have a misunderstanding here.

Although they are a matter of faith, doesn’t mean they can’t be known through logical axioms.

For example, I can’t prove to others that Jesus walked the earth 2000 years ago, but my faith can be supported by logic, in that Jesus is a popular name, so surely someone named Jesus walked the earth 2000 years ago.