Nobody Dies for a Lie

[JimL]

Oh gee, we can play that game too...

[ATTACH=CONFIG]27760[/ATTACH]

There is a difference. Atheists like myself don't actually believe that there was nothing that became something, that's actually what you christians believe, so you are mocking yourselves, not atheists.

[JimL]

Calling it "semantics", "word games" and "philosophical mumbo jumbo" won't make it go away. There's a difference between the actual teaching of the Trinity and your pathetic attempt to caricaturize it, even if you're too dense, or simply unwilling, to see it.

Well, I don't expect that calling the concept of the trinity what it is, i.e. illogical, will make it go away from the believers mind. But since no one else has yet to give a logical explanation of the trinity, perhaps you'd like to give it a try? No, of course you won't!

[One Bad Pig]

There is a difference. Atheists like myself don't actually believe that there was nothing that became something, that's actually what you christians believe, so you are mocking yourselves, not atheists.

...and there goes the point zipping over Jim's head.

We don't *actually* believe your caricature of the Trinity either. Thanks for playing.

[JonathanL]

Well, I don't expect that calling the concept of the trinity what it is, i.e. illogical, will make it go away from the believers mind. But since no one else has yet to give a logical explanation of the trinity, perhaps you'd like to give it a try? No, of course you won't!

There's nothing about the standard doctrine of the Trinity that breaks any rules of logic. As to whether or not anyone will ever convince you of that is another question altogether. Trying to disabuse you of the notion that your caricature of the Trinity is even moderately similar to the actual doctrine would be a herculean task in it's own right.

[KingsGambit]

There's nothing about the standard doctrine of the Trinity that breaks any rules of logic.

And I wish some Christians would stop claiming otherwise.

[Tassman]

There's nothing about the standard doctrine of the Trinity that breaks any rules of logic.

Well yes it does break the rules of logic. The Doctrine of the Trinity is logically incoherent. The problem is how God can be “One” and yet at the same time be “Three”, i.e. Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This is three, not one. That “one thing” can be identical with “three distinct things”, is an obvious direct contradiction. And yet, to say otherwise, is considered heresy.

[JimL]

There's nothing about the standard doctrine of the Trinity that breaks any rules of logic. As to whether or not anyone will ever convince you of that is another question altogether. Trying to disabuse you of the notion that your caricature of the Trinity is even moderately similar to the actual doctrine would be a herculean task in it's own right.

As I suspected, of course you wouldn't attempt to make logical sense of a concept that you know, even if you won't admit it, is completely illogical.

[JimL]

And I wish some Christians would stop claiming otherwise.

Perhaps you'd like to give it a try then. Explain how 1 entity, which you call god can logically be said to be made up of 3 persons, with 3 minds.

[Sparko]

There is a difference. Atheists like myself don't actually believe that there was nothing that became something, that's actually what you christians believe, so you are mocking yourselves, not atheists.

So what "something" created the universe, Jimmy? What existed before the universe?

[Sparko]

Well yes it does break the rules of logic. The Doctrine of the Trinity is logically incoherent. The problem is how God can be “One” and yet at the same time be “Three”, i.e. Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This is three, not one. That “one thing” can be identical with “three distinct things”, is an obvious direct contradiction. And yet, to say otherwise, is considered heresy.

You are merely asserting this again. You need to prove it is so. We have already said that the "three" is persons and the "one" is God. Two different classes.

[JimL]

So what "something" created the universe, Jimmy? What existed before the universe?

Depends on how you are defining THE UNIVERSE. If by UNIVERSE you mean the totality of everything that exists and has always existed, then nothing created it. If by universe you mean a particular form taken by that which has always existed then that form was created, or more aptly stated, was born, of THE UNIVERSE, or born of that which has always existed.

[JimL]

You are merely asserting this again. You need to prove it is so. We have already said that the "three" is persons and the "one" is God. Two different classes.

There is no need to prove it since it is illogical prima facie. 3 is not 1, 1 is not 3. Saying that God is 3 minds in 1 is no different than saying you are 3 minds in 1 person. The illogical doesn't become logical just because you declare that being that it is god we can claim anything at all and say it is logical.

[JonathanL]

Saying that God is 3 minds in 1

No one is saying that God is 3 minds in 1 mind.

The illogical doesn't become logical just because you declare that being that it is god we can claim anything at all and say it is logical.

The doctrine of the Trinity is very carefully crafted. The only illogical depictions (i.e ones with apparent contradictions) of it I have seen have been heretical ones, such as the caricatures you and Tassman have put forth.

[JimL]

No one is saying that God is 3 minds in 1 mind.

Of course you are. The Father has a mind, Jesus has a mind, the holy spirit has a mind, that's three, three, three minds in one. If you now want to argue that there is only one mind, then the notion that there are three distinct persons makes no sense.

The doctrine of the Trinity is very carefully crafted.

Crafted no doubt!

The only illogical depictions (i.e ones with apparent contradictions) of it I have seen have been heretical ones, such as the caricatures you and Tassman have put forth.

Funny that you won't describe these logical, non contradictory versions, of the trinity that you've seen.

[Sparko]

Depends on how you are defining THE UNIVERSE. If by UNIVERSE you mean the totality of everything that exists and has always existed, then nothing created it. If by universe you mean a particular form taken by that which has always existed then that form was created, or more aptly stated, was born, of THE UNIVERSE, or born of that which has always existed.

We already know the universe didn't always exist but started 14 billion years ago so what you believe is just wrong. Time itself didn't exist prior to then so it can't have "always" existed. Your belief is completely illogical.