Why the Trinity is impossible and illogical.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Celsus on March 19, 2010 at 12:08pm

No, you don't get it.

You were wrong because you substituted values that did not fit.

EXCEPT if 'God' is not an entity but a 'substance' or a 'property'. Is that the case?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mr McStizzle on March 19, 2010 at 12:15pm

No, you don't get it.

You were wrong because you substituted values that did not fit.

Oh really? So tell me what values DO fit.

EXCEPT if 'God' is not an entity but a 'substance' or a 'property'. Is that the case?
Now I said this to you before and you are doing it again. You have constructed a little box of what God should and should not be in your own mind and you are trying to force Him into it.

You have come to US with the questions and you are now trying to dictate to us what the answers should be and you claim that you are doing so out of "logic" If you have questions and are not sure of the answers, is it rational to dictate to those who may have the answers what their answers should be according to your finite understanding of what they are and what they believe? This is not a logical way to go about things.

God is many, many, many things. You cannot expect to be able to reduce him down to simple terms such as "entity" "substance" and "property" and expect to adequately describe someone who is infinite and eternal.

God is an entity.
God has substance.
God has properties.

Similarly, God is divine and is a divine entity.
Divinity can be a substance and a property.

Godliness, can be a substance or a property.

The more you try and force God to fit in your little box, the more you're going to struggle to comprehend.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Celsus on March 19, 2010 at 1:55pm

God is an entity.
God has substance.
God has properties.

Similarly, God is divine and is a divine entity.
Divinity can be a substance and a property.

Godliness, can be a substance or a property.

You're using the same word for a hell of a lot of different things, ideas and concept. That's quite confusing. Which, of course, is in your interest.

Also you should make your statement more clear then:

Since 'Jesus is God' does not actually mean, what one could think, that Jesus = God, you should say 'Jesus has the same substance as God' or 'Jesus has the same properties as God', etc. That would be more honest.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mr McStizzle on March 19, 2010 at 4:21pm

You're using the same word for a hell of a lot of different things, ideas and concept.

As I've said to you, "God" is complex and the word "God" can be used in reference to many different aspects of God. It is not in my "interest" to be confusing.

Since 'Jesus is God' does not actually mean, what one could think, that Jesus = God, you should say 'Jesus has the same substance as God' or 'Jesus has the same properties as God', etc. That would be more honest.

Now stop right there. It's one thing to say "be more clear" and another to say "be more honest" as you are implying that I am being deceptive. I am not. So I ask that you retract that statement.

Secondly "what one could think" can be anything. It's subjective. I do not have control over what you think.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Celsus on March 19, 2010 at 4:55pm

As I've said to you, "God" is complex and the word "God" can be used in reference to many different aspects of God. It is not in my "interest" to be confusing.

Of course it is. Otherwise you would have to admit that your mythology is full of contradictions and illogical statements.

Now stop right there. It's one thing to say "be more clear" and another to say "be more honest" as you are implying that I am being deceptive. I am not. So I ask that you retract that statement.

I won't retract it though. You know full well that people will read Jesus is God as Jesus = God.

Secondly "what one could think" can be anything. It's subjective. I do not have control over what you think.

Fact remains that 'Jesus has the same substance as God' or 'Jesus has the same properties as God' would be more to the alleged truth and also be more honest. Of course it doesn't sound as catchy and simple. That's why you don't do it.

Permalink Reply by Mr McStizzle on March 22, 2010 at 11:40am

Of course it is. Otherwise you would have to admit that your mythology is full of contradictions and illogical statements.

No I wouldn't :)

I won't retract it though. You know full well that people will read Jesus is God as Jesus = God.

I know that you have, this says nothing about what other people will do. I didn't realise you were omniscient :p

Fact remains that 'Jesus has the same substance as God' or 'Jesus has the same properties as God' would be more to the alleged truth and also be more honest. Of course it doesn't sound as catchy and simple. That's why you don't do it.

It's not about being catchy although simplicity is not a bad thing if you're trying to get a particular point across.

Permalink Reply by Celsus on March 18, 2010 at 6:24pm

Richard:

Celsus : "It's the same reasoning and logic."
How do you know?

You are claiming that 1+1+1 = 1 or did I miss something?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Richard Morgan on March 19, 2010 at 12:06pm

Celsus. Stop dodging questions, there's a good chap.
I asked you how you knew something.
Let me run it by you again :

Celsus : "It's the same reasoning and logic."
How do you know?
If you just answer that, we can move along.
We can worry about the inadequacy of my posts when we have dealt with the inadequacy of your non-replies.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Celsus on March 19, 2010 at 12:13pm

Weaseling again, I see.

I'll answer later today. Lunch time now.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Celsus on March 18, 2010 at 7:55pm

Richard:

Love is a higher law than logic.

I'm not sure about it being a higher law. But people definitely do lots of crazy/stupid things when 'in love'.

But you don't prove Love by 1+1=2.

'love' is proven by ACTS. Love is also simply chemicals in the brain.

"We can love, because He loved us first" - and it was completely illogical!

What's illogical about that? Why wouldn't he love his creation?

I'm still amazed that you're ok with such a contradictory and illogical theology as Christianity.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Richard Morgan on March 18, 2010 at 8:56pm

Celsus : "Love is also simply chemicals in the brain."

Prove that assertion please.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Feste on March 18, 2010 at 9:22pm

If love is simply chemicals, there is no love.

▶ Reply to This

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• Next ›
• Page