Originally posted by rogue06
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Philosophy 201 Guidelines
Cogito ergo sum
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Hypostatic Quaternity
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Machinist View Post
But shouldn't there be? It seems that there should when it comes to the reality of the Trinity. It would seem that the analogy is there somewhere but we have to figure it out.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Machinist View Post
But shouldn't there be? It seems that there should when it comes to the reality of the Trinity. It would seem that the analogy is there somewhere but we have to figure it out.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
I think the problem is the uniqueness of the Trinity - there is nothing like it in existence, hence, the difficulty in coming up with an analogy.
Further, it is a product of human language which is far from perfect. Even when something incredibly simple and basic is conveyed in the most concise and straightforward a way conceivable, there will always those who need further clarification or completely misunderstand it.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Think of arguments like the Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God, or the Ontological Argument, even the Moral argument which is being discussed right now in another thread. These argument assert that there are proofs (not just evidence) of the existence of God etc, that unequivocally prove the existence of some Source, because these properties are inherent in and characteristic of God's Very Nature, thus they are reflected in our reality.
If God is Triune, shouldn't there also be an argument from Logic and Reason that proves this as well. It just seems so fundamental.
Or is the Doctrine of the Trinity merely an agreed upon interpretation of certain texts in the Bible?
It seems to me that if one can argue the existence of God, or the irrationality of Atheism on grounds Morality, then it would seem that God's other Nature's could be argued as well...other natures like Trinality.
If it cannot be argued, then why is it such a damnable heresy to reject the Trinity?
It doesn't haver to be an analogy, but it does have to be an argument.Last edited by Machinist; 02-01-2021, 12:24 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Machinist View PostIf it cannot be argued, then why is it such a damnable heresy to reject the Trinity?
If somebody "rejects" the Trinity, they're basically rejecting the Godhead, and Christ in particular.
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Machinist View Post
If it cannot be argued, then why is it such a damnable heresy to reject the Trinity?
Look at it this way (and hopefully I don't muck this up) the concept of an omniscient, omnipotent God that lives outside of both time and space is also not an easy concept to convey, and there is no perfect way to do it. In fact, God "Himself" is pretty much unknowable. The Bible effectively says so[1] -- that He's fundamentally incomprehensible (although there are definitely things that we can know about God[2]). But He doesn't ask you to completely understand and comprehend Him does He? Neither are you asked to completely understand and comprehend the Trinity.
1.
2. Theologically speaking, to say that God is incomprehensible isn't the same as saying that God is utterly unknowable but rather that the finite cannot completely grasp the infinite.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostTheologically speaking, to say that God is incomprehensible isn't the same as saying that God is utterly unknowable but rather that the finite cannot completely grasp the infinite.
It's like an ant standing at the baby toe of a giant and tying to explain what or who the giant is -- only times a quadrillion or so.
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
Why should there be when even analogies about things we do have much more direct knowledge of break down if pushed too far?
Properties and Characteristics of God, such as Morality, Reason, etc have begat arguments among Apologists of the Faith. Why not the property of Trinality? Why doesn't it have it's argument? Is it only a concept synthesized from Scripture alone?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Machinist View Post
It does not have to be an analogy .An argument would work just fine. It just seems that it would be a standard argument.
Properties and Characteristics of God, such as Morality, Reason, etc have begat arguments among Apologists of the Faith. Why not the property of Trinality? Why doesn't it have it's argument? Is it only a concept synthesized from Scripture alone?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
If it is an argument for it rather than just analogy you are after, then what I call the "Relational argument" comes in. God is supposed to be love, and a unitarian entity could not embody love. Nor could such an attribute of love be inherent to such a being.
I am groping in the dark here, but I think there is something there, something in the room.
Let me brainstorm here a minute and stream some consciousness:
Morality is one of God's properties
God is the only source of Morality
God is unchanging therefore Morality is unchanging
This can be argued in a debate
Atheism is completely irrational
because it is evident, plain to see
that Morality is objective
And the atheist in his rebellion
refuses to see this truth
The Argument from Morality
is so old that a lot of people are
tired of hearing it, because it always ends
in stalemate, while both parties
believe they have they have the correct
perspective.
It's One of God's properties, His Qualities,
It is objective and it can be argued.
3-ness is also a Property or Quality of God
Just like Morality is
But 3-ness can't be deduced from simple examinations
of Logic and Reason like objective Morality can,
the Morality that obviously can't be inherent to humans,
and must come from an outside source.
I see 3-ness, Trinality, as a property of God
Just like I see Morality as a property of God.
These are different categories, different names,
but they are still a property.
Why can one property be argued effectively
while the other property only comes from a creative synthesis
of translations of ancient documents?
Can it be argued for instance, that man is a a trinality himself?
The Body, Soul and Spirit perhaps?
Or is this merely another cleaving of the air in the upper regions
of space beyond the clouds?
Can an Ontology be synthesized like Art,
Just on the fly?
Just how malleable is Reason exactly?
Or if it's objective and can be argued to be so,
why can't the trinity be argued by emphasizing
a 3-ness that is right before our eyes, and is the bedrock
that all reason and Logic is built upon?
Perhaps, there is a 3-ness that we just haven't discovered yet.
The science of Artificial Intelligence has reached
a point where they are borrowing terms from philosophy
to describe their domain.
We are placing the cupola on the tower of Babyl.
Surely a 3-ness will confront the scientist soon
And it will be not only a technological advent
but will re-write the code of our Ontological Matrix.
In his attempts to be God, man will discover God
and it will bear an unmistakable 3-ness.
And at that point, Trinitarianisn will have an argument
that they can bring to the world
as effective and solid as the argument from Morality.
It will be a New dispensational era, so to speak.
It will be a New Ontological Dispensation,
an Epistimological Dispensation,
a logical one, a moral one,
when man discovers God.
And we're on the cusp, and if they keep pushing the envelope
they will find a fundamental trinity of things.
There has to be something there, more than just
ancient scrolls that we're extracting this enigmatic and incomprehensible
concept of the trinity from.
Clear as mud?
Comment
-
There is nothing stopping God from being a Quarternity, or a Quintity, etc, but the Bible only alludes to a Trinity. It in various places mentions that there is only ONE God YHWH. But then it mentions three distinct persons as being God, The son, the Holy Spirit and the Father. Each is said to have various characteristics that only God has, such as Creator of the Universe, being omniscient, etc. But they are also shown to be distinct persons. The Son talks to the Father, the Father speaks of his Son, and the Son speaks of the Holy Spirit as "another counselor" so we have three persons, yet only one God. Not three Gods. That is the Trinity.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Post...Each is said to have various characteristics that only God has, such as Creator of the Universe...
At least we see that all three get along marvelously well!
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostThere is nothing stopping God from being a Quarternity, or a Quintity, etc, but the Bible only alludes to a Trinity. It in various places mentions that there is only ONE God YHWH. But then it mentions three distinct persons as being God, The son, the Holy Spirit and the Father. Each is said to have various characteristics that only God has, such as Creator of the Universe, being omniscient, etc. But they are also shown to be distinct persons. The Son talks to the Father, the Father speaks of his Son, and the Son speaks of the Holy Spirit as "another counselor" so we have three persons, yet only one God. Not three Gods. That is the Trinity.
I was just thinking that perhaps there was some fractal of it observable through Logic or Reason here in our domain, independent of the Bible.
It is what it is.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
Even in that part, God created the Heavens and the Earth (Gen 1:1) but Jesus was God's agent of creation, because HE (Jesus) created all that is. So, God through Jesus created the world, or Jesus, as God's agent of creation....
At least we see that all three get along marvelously well!
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
|
161 responses
514 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
Yesterday, 05:44 PM
|
||
Started by seer, 02-15-2024, 11:24 AM
|
88 responses
354 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
03-01-2024, 09:27 AM
|
||
Started by Diogenes, 01-22-2024, 07:37 PM
|
21 responses
133 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
03-25-2024, 10:59 PM
|
Comment