Exploring Trinitarian Logic

[Wrangler]

God is spirit and could not enter time.

Nonsense! So many claims that contradict Scripture. Who is speaking words about Jesus is this verse?
And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”
Matthew 3:17

 

[Lizbeth]

Yes He had a beginning as only the Father was in eternity, one God the Father maker of man and earth and all that in them is.

Yet scripture says in at least three places that Christ created everything...? He and the Father are one.

And Christ appeared as the angel of the Lord (in glorified body) in the old testament because He had ascended to heaven/eternity that exists outside the boundaries of time/space. (Actually as believers we may even taste of this...tasting the powers of the world to come....like the wind that you can't tell where it came from or where it is going.)

 

[Ritajanice]

@Wrangler ..would you say that he and the Spirit are one.

Which means one in accord?

Jesus was one in accord with his Father’s Spirit, not that he was Father God?

 

[Hepzibah]

Nonsense! So many claims that contradict Scripture. Who is speaking words about Jesus is this verse?
And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”
Matthew 3:17

That is the Father God who is not the Son.

Nonsense! So many claims that contradict Scripture. Who is speaking words about Jesus is this verse?
And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”
Matthew 3:17

 

[Hepzibah]

Yet scripture says in at least three places that Christ created everything...? He and the Father are one.

And Christ appeared as the angel of the Lord (in glorified body) in the old testament because He had ascended to heaven/eternity that exists outside the boundaries of time/space. (Actually as believers we may even taste of this...tasting the powers of the world to come....like the wind that you can't tell where it came from or where it is going.)

I think it is on the lines of the Father creating all things through the Son. So Christ created all things in a sense too.

 

[Wrangler]

@Wrangler ..would you say that he and the Spirit are one.

Which means one in accord?

Jesus was one in accord with his Father’s Spirit, not that he was Father God?

Yes. Jesus prayed to God that his followers would be one, like they are one. This does not mean billions of people are a multi-person person.

 

[Wrangler]

That is the Father God who is not the Son.

So, God the Father - who alone is God - is able to interact with time and speak on his on accord.

 

[Hepzibah]

So, God the Father - who alone is God - is able to interact with time and speak on his on accord.

Yes since the Word was begotten. I don't understand entirely how it works though it seems that you do.

 

[Wrangler]

Yes since the Word was begotten. I don't understand entirely how it works though it seems that you do.

OMG! Trinitarians believe in this mystical word being a separate person from the person the words come from in the face of text proof that is not the case. Matthew 3:17.

 

[Hey You!]

We can express the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity (three “persons” in one God) as a set of propositions in this way:

1. There is only one God.
2. The Father is God.
3. The Son is God.
4. The Father is not the Son.
5. The Holy Spirit is God.
6. The Holy Spirit is not the Father.
7. The Holy Spirit is not the Son.

For simplicity’s sake we need consider only 1 through 4 (for 5 through 7 will stand or fall on the same logical analysis we apply to 1 through 4):

1. There is only one God.
2. The Father is God.
3. The Son is God.
4. The Father is not the Son.

The difficulty in defending the Trinity has always been that these four propositions are, as a group, logically inconsistent when analyzed from the standpoint of the three basic rules of logical equivalence: self-identity (everything is identical to itself, i.e., x = x); symmetry (if two things are equivalent, they are equivalent in any order, i.e., if x = y, then y = x); and transitivity (if one thing is the same as another and that other is the same as a third, then the first is the same as the third, i.e., if x = y and y = z then x = z). The orthodox doctrine of the Trinity fares ill in this analysis.

To make them logically consistent, it is tempting to sacrifice one of the four tenets – and most early heresies took this tack. Thus, Arius sacrificed the third one:

1. There is only one God.
2. The Father is God.
4. The Father is not the Son.
3′. Therefore the Son is not God.

and Sabellius sacrificed the fourth one:

1. There is only one God.
2. The Father is God.
3. The Son is God.
4′. Therefore the Father is the Son.

Both Arius’ argument and Sabellius’ argument are logically consistent because, unlike the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, they satisfy all three of the aforementioned principles of logical consistency. Arius and Sabellius, although approaching the inconsistency from different perspectives, each preferred rationality to irrationality―even if it meant preferring heresy to orthodoxy.

Now, we Trinitarians have two choices. We can simply throw up our hands and declare that God does not have to play by the rules of logical consistency, thereby forever assigning the Trinity to the status of unfathomable mystery. Or, we can allow for identity and equivalence to be relative to their contexts. Thus, “Robert is good” can be consistent with “Robert is not good” as long as a different sense of “good” holds for each proposition (e.g., he is a good theologian; he is not a good golfer.)

To say that “The Father is not the Son” is likewise context-dependent and predicate-specific. One can maintain without contradiction both that “The Father is not the same person as the Son” and “The Father is the same God as the Son” by separating out personhood from Godhood. How to tease them apart is the ultimate challenge of orthodox Trinitarian theology.

Who want to take a deep dive with me here?

1+1+1=1?? ~ * January 1

Matthew 28:19 KJV; Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

There are several Verses in the Bible which teach us that God is a Trinity. What is a Trinity? The Trinity is a concept of God existing as three Divine persons; yet remaining One God. This is not an easy idea to wrap our Minds around. Some suggest examples like the three states of water; gas, liquid and solid. Others suggest Government as a model for the Trinity; the Legislature, Judiciary and the Executive branches are the one Federal Government. But examples outside of the Bible have a way of falling short in describing the Trinity. ~ It’s said there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word and the Spirit; and these three are one. To many people, this is one of the most absurd things that can be said, and they claim it’s intellectually inconceivable! They say that it is a Mathematical Fact that 1+1+1=3, but 1+1+1=1 is laughable; and they’re right. ~ You object, “Why are you conceding the argument so easily??” I’m not but the truth is the truth; right? You ask, “Then what kind of intellectual gymnastics are you going to try and pull to make your point?” No Gymnastics necessary, just the simple Math that is taught in our Elementary Schools…

It is amazing how as we grow older, we lose some of our simplest Cognitive skills. On the television show ‘Brain Games’, they tested a group of adults and children by using a simple drawing of a School bus. It was yellow, had wheels and windows; but both ends looked the same. The question was asked which way would the bus go if it pulled away; left or right? About 25% of adults got it right but almost all of the children were correct. When the children were asked why they said it would go left, they said because the bus door was on the other side, and this told them which end was the front of the bus. ~ When we were in Elementary School, we learned that 1x1=1. We also learned that 1x1x1=1; we see that the concept of the Trinity is really child’s play! There is no need to jump through any ‘algebraic hoops’; Three Ones equaling One is a Logical concept! We should be asking, “How is it that I didn’t see that?” ~ There are other things that we also don’t see until it is put in a way we can understand. God gave us the Ten Commandments, and they tell us not to commit Adultery or Murder. We can say we’ve never Murdered, and some can say they’ve never committed Adultery. But Jesus put it in an elementary way we can understand; he said if you Hate someone you’ve Murdered them in your Heart and if you’ve Lusted after someone you’ve committed Adultery in your Heart! God sends Sinners to an eternal Hell but you don’t have to go…

The good news is that the Gospel is also elementary. ~ For God so loved the World he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting Life! The second person of the Trinity condescended to be born as the Man Jesus Christ, and suppressed his Divine privileges to live on our level. Jesus lived a Sinless life as only he could, and this pleased God his Father. Jesus came to die and be the sacrifice for Sin, so that we can have eternal Life. He was buried but arose from the dead and ascended to Heaven, where he awaits the time his Father has set for him to return and Judge the world. When you put your Faith in the finished Work of the GodMan Jesus Christ, you will be Saved. ~ Here is some more simple Math for you. God became Man and the two are one; 100% God and 100% Man, yet only One Being. 100% x 100% = One. ~ 1÷1÷1 also equals One; the Word and the Spirit proceed from the Father, the three are One!

John 1:14 NIV; The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

 

[ProDeo]

Look closer sister . IN the older translation it says HE POSSESSED ME
not created . HE POSSESSED WISDOM and WHO is made the WISDOM of GOD unto us , JESUS the CHRIST .
The very essence of GOD .

Proverbs 8:22 “The LORD possessed me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old.
Proverbs 8:23 Ages ago I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth.
Proverbs 8:24 When there were no depths I was brought forth, when there were no springs abounding with water.

 

[ProDeo]

@Hepzibah

Pro 8:23
I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.

Which translation is that ?

 

[Marvelloustime]

Who is Christ . THE WORD . GOD SPOKE .
His essence comes forth of HIM and creates . Let there be LIGHT and there was light .
The beauty is that the Word became flesh .
All who do believe in He whom GOD did send have eternal life .
My Fathers commandment is eternal life .
This is MY Son in whom i am well pleased , HEAR YE HIM .
When CHRIST JESUS was speaking to the jews
that beleived not on HIM , He said As i said ye hear me not for ye have not His word abiding in you .
HE who is of GOD hears GODS WORDS . as john would later write
HE who hears us is OF GOD and HE who hears not us IS NOT of GOD .
That oughtta kick that ol golden bull of interfaith right over as it tries to say otherwise and that all religoins
be serving God . Now to the trenches and forward march for these be the last days my friend .

@amigo de christo

 

[CadyandZoe]

Trinitarians understand that the Word became human as John said: "the Word flesh became" (Jn. 1:14), which indicates that prior to becoming human, the Word was not a human, the same Word he identified as God 13 verses prior in Jn. 1:1.

But John doesn't say the word was a person. You are adding that.

Secondly, I didn't say "Jn. 1:1 says 'the Word was sent'", but rather I asked a rhetorical question, "Who sent the Word to become a human?"

I understand your question, but it assumes your answer.

Jesus healed a man on the Sabbath and said, “My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working", and "therefore the Jews (the Judaeans, a mixture of scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees) sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath, but also called God his own Father, making himself equal with God." (Jn. 5:1-18, cf. Potmg: V2)

John faithfully records the Pharisaical interpretation of what Jesus said, but we would be mistaken to think that either Jesus or John would agree with the Jews. That is, Jesus' statements were not intended to convey that he (Jesus) is equal to God. So, this is not a case of Jesus claiming to be God.

Jesus said that Abraham did see His day, as in prophetically, through a Grace of God, and that he rejoiced. That's why the Judaeans responded to Him asking, "You are not yet fifty years old and You are telling us that Abraham has seen You and You have seen him?", and Jesus answered in the affirmative explaining that He exists eternally, "[...] before Abraham was born I am" (Jn. 8:56-58, cf. Potmg: V4).

Your premise does not support your conclusion. If, as you say, Abraham saw Jesus' day "as in prophetically," then Jesus' day was not yet a reality. And if Jesus' day was not yet a reality, then Jesus wasn't either.

Jesus's reply is significant, because only God says "I am"

That isn't true. Jesus has used the phrase "I am" more than once in contexts where the meaning is clearly "I am he"; That is, "I am the coming Messiah spoken of by the prophets."

It was understood that Jesus said He's God, and thus they took up stones to throw at Him for "blasphemy". (Jn. 8:59, cf. Potmg: V4)

I disagree. Jesus claimed to be the Messiah. The Jews misconstrued Jesus' statements as a claim to be God. Thus, Jesus finds precedence in Psalm 82, where the Psalmist refers to men as gods.

The motive for the Judaeans attempting to stone Jesus for "blasphemy" in the scene of Jn. 10:22-39 (cf. Potmg: V4) is made clear by them when they gave Him their explanation for doing so: "because you, being a man, make yourself God", right after He had stated that (I) He's the Son of God, (II) He and the Father are one, and (III) the Father is in Him, and that He is in the Father, and so on.

Here is another faithful record of a faulty interpretation by the Jews. Jesus' claim to be the son of God was not also a claim to be God. Jesus wouldn't support that idea. Rather, he argues that being a man does not disqualify him from being a son of God. This is the same line of argument Paul gave in his letter to the Hebrews.

Breaking it down, David writes that the Lord (God) said to David's Lord (Christ) "sit at My right hand (the place of greatest honor). Jesus asked the Pharisees why David would call his "son," meaning his own descendant, "my Lord" who sits at the right hand of God, unless Christ has some significant status beyond being David's descendant. The Pharisees didn't respond. (Matt. 22:41-46, cf. Potmg: V5)

Right, the topic of discussion was the rank of Jesus as compared to the rank of David. Jesus is not claiming to be a member of a supposed Godhead in that context.

he was asking to see if Jesus would once again affirm that He's not only the Christ (Messiah), but God in the flesh as well (someone more than solely a descendant of king David). Jesus affirmed that He's the Christ (Messiah), and the Son of God, and thus they accused Him of "blasphemy", and called for His death. (Matt. 26:57-68, Lk. 22:66-71, cf. Potmg: V5)

I disagree because, as we have seen so far, the Jews were misconstruing Jesus' comments to mean something that he would never claim. The trial of Jesus is no exception. The accusation against Jesus was false because Jesus never claimed to be God in the flesh as the Jews concluded.

 

[Marvelloustime]

The beauty of it all is
What did the gosple say
and let us beleive them words to be TRUE .
In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with GOD and GOD was the Word .
For every word written is true and is TRUTH . Thats right dear sister , you just march onwards in the LORD .
I keep it real simple . IF it is written we beleive it , whether we fully understand it or not .
For the same Word said to the churches , I AM ALPHA and OMEGA , the first and the last .
Oh it might be a wee bit hard to understand this , YET TRUE IT BE and let no man
try and change or alter words , as many do , to fit their own understandings . Rather Let the words
by THE SPIRIT form our understanding . As i KNOW you already KNOW that dear sister .

@amigo de christo

 

[Lizbeth]

Which translation is that ?

KJV

 

[CadyandZoe]

Thanks. So you agree.

I accept logic as tool of rationality, yes.

Again:

GOD IS THE WORD.
THE WORD IS GOD.

No, not the same for the reasons I gave you the first time. According to Trinitarians, "God" is the term they use for "being", whereas "Word" is the term they use for an attribute of his being. An attribute of a thing is not the thing in itself. Since your second statement is invalid, the two statements are not equivalence.

 

[Lizbeth]

@Wrangler ..would you say that he and the Spirit are one.

Which means one in accord?

Jesus was one in accord with his Father’s Spirit, not that he was Father God?

He certainly was in one accord with the Father.......but also at the same time it goes deeper in meaning. We need to look at scripture in light of other scriptures. Because for example, Jesus also said elsewhere that if you have seen me you have seen the Father.

 

[CadyandZoe]

C....your post is so riddled with error, misconceptions and who knows what else....
I can't tackle this.

I would recommend to you that you learn the Christian faith since you have the word CHRISTIAN under your avatar.

Also, I asked you for scripture...you personal opinion is of no interest to either me or anyone reading along.

I see no scripture in the above tirade - which- frankly, makes no sense.

Don't confuse a lack of familiarity with invalidity. I recommend that you trace the Biblical background on various terms such as "son of God," "Christ," and "son of Man. " Then, you will be in a better position to make sense of the NT passages.

 

[Wrangler]

He certainly was in one accord with the Father.......but also at the same time it goes deeper in meaning.

No. Not deeper. A is A. That's what it means (in one accord) and that's it.

And the accord was not total since he asked for the bitter cup to be taken from him. I don't blame him for that. I blame trinitarians for supposing 3 = 1.