God a Trinity.

[Kbertsche]

My point is not macro vs micro, but that many things in science are counter-intuitive, yet are still true and self-consistent. A large part of learning science is retraining one's intuition, whether wave-particle duality, relativity, or a host of other issues.

Theology, likewise, has a number of claims which are counter-intuitive, e.g. the hypostatic union and the Trinity. But this does NOT mean that they are inconsistent.

[Tassman]

My point is not macro vs micro, but that many things in science are counter-intuitive, yet are still true and self-consistent. A large part of learning science is retraining one's intuition, whether wave-particle duality, relativity, or a host of other issues.

Theology, likewise, has a number of claims which are counter-intuitive, e.g. the hypostatic union and the Trinity. But this does NOT mean that they are inconsistent.

Indeed! Logically consistent fiction! There's no way to verify theological claims, they're based upon Revelation not observed evidence.

[Sparko]

Tassman, I think we Christians understand modalism better than you do. everyone has told you that you are wrong. It has to do with confusing the persons of the Trinity. Instead of having three distinct persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, you have one person who is the Father in heaven, then he comes down to earth as the Son (which means God is not in heaven any longer), then goes back to heaven and becomes the Father again (meaning there is no longer a Son) and the Holy Spirit is just his force acting in the world. That is modalism.

That is nothing like what I said. You are doing your idiotic strawman argument again. Making up something to accuse people of to get out of admitting that you were wrong or don't understand the topic. Everyone knows this about you. It is embarrassing that you keep attempting it and pretend like nobody knows what you are doing. We see right through you.

Now if I said that Trump was a Father and then became his own son, then I would be using modalisim. I did not say that.

[37818]

Indeed! Logically consistent fiction! There's no way to verify theological claims, they're based upon Revelation not observed evidence.

Revelation would have a participant who would also constitute an observer. The physical laws of our universe constitute natural revelation (Romans 10:18; Psalm 19:1-4; Genesis 1:1). The scientific method is used to observe them in experiment to understand and test hypothesis about them.

Uncaused existence needs no creator. An uncaused cause is contingent on uncaused existence. All causes are finite and temporal.

An uncaused existence as one thing. An uncaused cause is one thing which has opposite characteristics: Being uncaused without its own beginning. And being a cause is a beginning of other things. Being both eternal and temporal.

Three characteristics: Uncaused, Existence and a Cause.

[shunyadragon]

And if a photon is fully a particle, there is no part of it which is not particle. Conversely, if it is fully a wave, there is no part of it which is not wave. It is one or the other; it can't be both simultaneously.

The hypostatic union and the Trinity are counter-intuitive, but they are no more inconsistent than wave-particle duality.

There is no remote coherent comparison here between the 'observed' wave-particle duality phenomenon and the theological 'claim' physical/spiritual nature of Jesus Christ

[Sparko]

There is no remote coherent comparison here between the 'observed' wave-particle duality phenomenon and the theological 'claim' physical/spiritual nature of Jesus Christ

He was making an analogy of something having 2 different natures. Nobody said Jesus was a wave and a particle. Go back to sleep.

[Tassman]

Tassman, I think we Christians understand modalism better than you do. everyone has told you that you are wrong. It has to do with confusing the persons of the Trinity. Instead of having three distinct persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, you have one person who is the Father in heaven, then he comes down to earth as the Son (which means God is not in heaven any longer), then goes back to heaven and becomes the Father again (meaning there is no longer a Son) and the Holy Spirit is just his force acting in the world. That is modalism.

[Tassman]

He was making an analogy of something having 2 different natures. Nobody said Jesus was a wave and a particle. Go back to sleep.

Shunya is merely saying (correctly) that it's not a meaningful analogy.

[37818]

Shunya is merely saying (correctly) that it's not a meaningful analogy.

How is it not a meaningful analogy? A photon being both a wave and a particle. And the person Jesus Christ being both actually human and actually God being the Son of God? That is the claim (John 5:18-23).

[Sparko]

Tassy. If I said that Trump was a father, who became his own son that is what modalism is. Saying Trump is a Father and a husband at the same time is not modalism. I was giving you an example of being two different things at the same time. Modalism doesn't do that. It is a serial role game. The Father becomes the Son and stops being the Father while on earth, then he goes back to heaven as the Father and the Son no longer exists. THAT is modalism.

God being a actor playing roles. The Trinity says that God is three eternally existing persons who are one God. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all different persons but the same divine substance: God.

You are confused because I used "father" in my example with Trump. It had nothing to do with the Father and Son in the Trinity. It was merely an analogy. Being Father or Husband, etc. are not natures. They were merely examples of how one being can be fully more than thing. That just because someone is fully X, doesn't mean he can't be fully Y too. As long as X and Y are not the same thing. He can't be fully X and fully Not X at the same time.

[shunyadragon]

He was making an analogy of something having 2 different natures. Nobody said Jesus was a wave and a particle. Go back to sleep.

Bad analogy, and not meaningful.

[Kbertsche]

There is no remote coherent comparison here between the 'observed' wave-particle duality phenomenon and the theological 'claim' physical/spiritual nature of Jesus Christ

Shuny, have you actually observed the phenomenon of waved-particle duality? Has 99+% of the populace?

To most people, both are claims. In both cases, something (or someone) is claimed to fully possess two natures, natures which we intuitively think of as mutually exclusive. But in both cases, the data (nature or Scripture) tells us that this is really the way that it is. So we re-train our intuition to accept it.

Conceptually, wave-particle duality and the hypostatic union are highly analogous.

[Kbertsche]

This might help, from the IVP Pocket Dictionary of Theology:

Source: Pocket Dictionary of Theology

modalismSabellianism. An early-third-century trinitarian heresy named for Sabellius, who taught that the one God revealed himself successively in salvation history first as Father (Creator and Lawgiver), then as Son (Redeemer) and finally as Spirit (Sustainer, Giver of Grace). Hence for Sabellius there is only one divine person, not three as in Christian trinitarianism.

© Copyright Original Source

In essence, modalism says that God "morphs" between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

[shunyadragon]

Shuny, have you actually observed the phenomenon of waved-particle duality? Has 99+% of the populace?

Actually, yes in laboratory experiments. It is an observable phenomenon.

To most people, both are claims.

Disagree, most definitely most scientists will not make this analogous comparison.

In both cases, something (or someone) is claimed to fully possess two natures, natures which we intuitively think of as mutually exclusive. But in both cases, the data (nature or Scripture) tells us that this is really the way that it is. So we re-train our intuition to accept it.

Conceptually, wave-particle duality and the hypostatic union are highly analogous.

We will have to agree to disagree, the observable nature of natural phenomenon is not analogous to the religious claim of the nature Jesus Christ.

[Tassman]

This might help, from the IVP Pocket Dictionary of Theology:

Source: Pocket Dictionary of Theology

modalismSabellianism. An early-third-century trinitarian heresy named for Sabellius, who taught that the one God revealed himself successively in salvation history first as Father (Creator and Lawgiver), then as Son (Redeemer) and finally as Spirit (Sustainer, Giver of Grace). Hence for Sabellius there is only one divine person, not three as in Christian trinitarianism.

© Copyright Original Source

In essence, modalism says that God "morphs" between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Yes. Modalism is the doctrine of one deity manifested in three separate aspects. Conversely, Orthodox Theology states that the godhead consists of three separate persons and that these three persons are truly distinct one from another.