Three-in-One = Trinity?

[pro_universal]

The real issue is this: If you think that the Trinity is a “blatant contradiction,” then you haven’t adequately studied Trinitarian doctrine. IOW, you’re conflating your knowledge of the subject at hand with knowledge of the subject at hand.

– Mark L. Chance.

That’s certainly a comfortable notion for you to hold. That doesn’t make it the truth, though.

If you’d like to point me to those sources of “trinitarian doctrine” that make the trinity non-contradictory, please do so.

 

[pro_universal]

Your definition of “reason” is that of a human being.

You are absolutely right. This is my definition.

If you have to believe things that your human reasoning rejects as contradictory, then you are believing with blind faith (ie, you can’t see any possible way that it makes sense…but you believe anyway just because.)

 

[Valke2]

The equation I’ve seen for the Trinity is 1 x 1 x 1=1

The Trinity isn’t illogical or unreasonable, just beyond reason.

Isn’t being beyond reason another way of saying illogical or unreasonable?

 

[exoflare]

Isn’t being beyond reason another way of saying illogical or unreasonable?

The thing is, the Trinity is not “beyond reason”, although we will never fully grasp all the intricacies of it in this lifetime. Saying it is beyond reason is a mistake too many people make when they are trying to explain it and have no idea what they mean. Most Catholics aren’t adequately prepared to explain it either though…

 

[mlchance]

Isn’t being beyond reason another way of saying illogical or unreasonable?

Only if one is being reductionist. For example, I’m hard-pressed to come up with very many good reasons why my wife loves me, yet she does. Knowing my wife as well as I do, I can’t honestly say she’s either illogical or unreasonable.



– Mark L. Chance.

 

[pro_universal]

The thing is, the Trinity is not “beyond reason”, although we will never fully grasp all the intricacies of it in this lifetime. Saying it is beyond reason is a mistake too many people make when they are trying to explain it and have no idea what they mean. Most Catholics aren’t adequately prepared to explain it either though…

Ah, I see…it’s not “beyond reason”, we just won’t ever understand it

 

[Vincent]

There’s a difference between “mystery” and “blatant contradiction.” This is an example.

1. • It’s a mystery, not because it’s something we can’t know anything about, but because it’s something we can’t know everything about.
   • The following are contradictions:
   • 3 Gods in 1 God or
   • 3 persons in 1 person or
   • 3 natures in 1 nature
   **That is *not *what we’re saying. **
   
   We’re saying,
   • 3 persons in 1 nature
   Since “3” and “1” do not describe the same terms, there is no contradiction.

 

[exoflare]

1. • It’s a mystery, not because it’s something we can’t know anything about, but because it’s something we can’t know everything about.
   • The following are contradictions:
   • 3 Gods in 1 God or
   • 3 persons in 1 person or
   • 3 natures in 1 nature
   **That is *not ***what we’re saying.
   
   We’re saying,
   • 3 persons in 1 nature
   Since “3” and “1” do not describe the same terms, there is no contradiction.

1. 
   Yeah, Muslims don’t ever pay attention to the whole sentence though. When you say this they hear:
   
   “bla bla bla** 3** bla bla bla 1 bla bla bla…”
   
   …and that is when they cry “contradiction!”

 

[mlchance]

Jewish scholar Martin Buber, in his wonderful book I and Thou, made the observation that if God had not been a person before creating Adam and Eve, he would have been a person after doing so. I’ve long wondered if Buber realized how close he was to stumbling on the cusp of Trinitarian doctrine. After all, God, who is perfect, cannot change, since change implies either altering to a more perfect state or a less perfect state, both of which are impossible for God to do.

Thus, God could not change to become a person. He must have always been a person. But before the creation of heaven and earth, no one existed but God. So how could he be a person, which requires being in relationship with other persons?

Quite simply: There must be a multiplicity of divine Persons.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[pro_universal]

1. • It’s a mystery, not because it’s something we can’t know anything about, but because it’s something we can’t know everything about.
   • The following are contradictions:
   • 3 Gods in 1 God or
   • 3 persons in 1 person or
   • 3 natures in 1 nature
   **That is *not ***what we’re saying.
   
   We’re saying,
   • 3 persons in 1 nature
   Since “3” and “1” do not describe the same terms, there is no contradiction.

1. 
   The problem is in distinguishing between the persons and the nature. Each of those persons is fully God–ie, they are nothing other than God.
   
   Yet, each person is distinct. And there is only one God?
   
   That is a contradiction. No two ways about it. Unless the persons possess something other than God (in which case, you’ve said that God can be both God and not God at the same time in the same person), there is no possible way to make sense of this formula.

 

[pro_universal]

Jewish scholar Martin Buber, in his wonderful book I and Thou, made the observation that if God had not been a person before creating Adam and Eve, he would have been a person after doing so. I’ve long wondered if Buber realized how close he was to stumbling on the cusp of Trinitarian doctrine. After all, God, who is perfect, cannot change, since change implies either altering to a more perfect state or a less perfect state, both of which are impossible for God to do.

That’s an interesting citation to a book that does absolutely zero for the trinitarian case. God being “a person” is not even remotely like God being “Three distinct persons, each fully God, each not the same as the other”

Thus, God could not change to become a person. He must have always been a person. But before the creation of heaven and earth, no one existed but God. So how could he be a person, which requires being in relationship with other persons?

Quite simply: There must be a multiplicity of divine Persons.

– Mark L. Chance.

Again, that’s great, but you are seizing on an idea that adds precisely zero to the issue of trinitarian doctrine.

If you have the time, you might want to take a look at St. Augustine’s On the Trinity…besides noticing the magical number 6 in nature, the sum total of the book is that the trinity is not possible to understand.

 

[mlchance]

Again, that’s great, but you are seizing on an idea that adds precisely zero to the issue of trinitarian doctrine.

I’m sorry. In the future, should I forward desired posts to you via private message for your approval before posting them publicly? Or should I point out that the sum total of your contribution to the “issue of trinitarian doctrine” has been the equivalent of grunting “Nuh uh” over and over again?

If you have the time, you might want to take a look at St. Augustine’s On the Trinity…besides noticing the magical number 6 in nature, the sum total of the book is that the trinity is not possible to understand.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Chris_LaRock]

Let’s go to sacred scripture:

Gen 1:26 And God 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.
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Gen 11:7 Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.

1Jo 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

 

[Vincent]

The problem is in distinguishing between the persons and the nature.

Are you saying that you don’t know the difference between “person” and “nature”?

Each of those persons is fully God–ie, they are nothing other than God.

Each person totally possesses the same one divine nature. Thus, each is fully God.

Yet, each person is distinct. And there is only one God?

Yes, there is only one God because there is only one divine nature, that each of the three persons totally possess in common.

If each person had his own divine nature that was separate from the divine natures possessed by the others, there would be three separate divine natures. Thus, the three persons would be three Gods. But that is not the Trinity.

The distinction is found in the relations between the persons.

 

[hamba2han]

Yes, let us go to sacred scripture.

The word ‘Trinity’ is not mentioned even once in the Bible… but it is indeed mentioned in the Qur’an.

004.171
O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not “Trinity” : desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.

005.072-73
They do blaspheme who say: “Allah is Christ the son of Mary.” But said Christ: “O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.” Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.
They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

 

[exoflare]

Yes, let us go to sacred scripture.

The word ‘Trinity’ is not mentioned even once in the Bible… but it is indeed mentioned in the Qur’an.

004.171
O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not “Trinity” : desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.

005.072-73
**They do blaspheme who say: “Allah is Christ the son of Mary.” But said Christ: “O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.” Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help. **
They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

He said SACRED scripture.

 

[Chris_LaRock]

Lol! :d

 

[hamba2han]

He said SACRED scripture.

As you wish… but it still does not explain why the word ‘Trinity’ does not appear in the “SACRED scripture” considering it’s undoubted significance in Christianity…

 

[Chris_LaRock]

The words ‘Muslim’ and ‘Islam’ don’t appear in the bible either.

 

[exoflare]

As you wish… but it still does not explain why the word ‘Trinity’ does not appear in the “SACRED scripture” considering it’s undoubted significance in Christianity…

Why do you suppose that every word that you use must be found in scripture? There’s no reason for it, except that you think this kind of convoluted logic serves your purpose at the moment.