Wednesday, 18 June 2008

The Trinity


OK, so god is a single being, ya know, because Xianity is all monotheistic and stuff, right? But, god is also three distinct beings in the father, son, and holy ghost. Um, what? How is it that god is both one being and three beings, and Xianity is monotheistic? Well, it's just another contradiction of course. When your whole religion is based on contradiction, I suppose it gets easier after a while.

Also, why is Satan not considered at least a demi-god in some Xian sects? Wouldn't this also be a violation of the monotheism thing?

13 comments:

symbiontmusic said...

There are no comments because this point cannot be argued! I have a very Christian friend who bumbles his words when trying to explain this. It's amazing how he states that I take the bible to literally. 2+2 is 4. The statement you have posted is basic simple math. My hat is off to you.

Patrick Dunnevant said...

Symbiont, don't jump to conclusions. Do you really think someone hasn't raised this objection in the two thousand years Christianity has been around? Are you really so arrogant as to say that it hasn't been refuted by theologians and philosophers for thousands of years as well? How in the world is merely saying, "Well, that doesn't make sense," a coherent argument against Christianity?

Let's delve into this, then.

OK, so god is a single being, ya know, because Xianity is all monotheistic and stuff, right?

Well, no. God isn't a "single being" as you are calling it. A more correct analysis would be that Christianity is trinitarian.

But, god is also three distinct beings in the father, son, and holy ghost.

Three persons in one essence, not three distinct beings in one single being.

Um, what? How is it that god is both one being and three beings, and Xianity is monotheistic?

How is it that a triangle has three corners, but is considered one shape?

Christianity is only sort of "monotheistic." Again, "trinitarian" is a much better word.


Well, it's just another contradiction of course.

Merely saying, "Duh, that doesn't make sense?!!!" does not prove that there is a contradiction here.

When your whole religion is based on contradiction, I suppose it gets easier after a while.

Ironically, atheism in it's entirety is self-contradictory: it's an orderly appeal to reason for a reasonless universe without order, whose purpose is to evidence that there is no purpose, and whose morality is to argue that we should teach that there are no morals except that which they have reasoned for their purpose, which, in turn, produces the ultimate emotional articulation of self-centeredness which is fearfully bent towards the cover up and suppression of belief in an ultimate personal cause who brings order, purpose, and judgment to all things.

Also, why is Satan not considered at least a demi-god in some Xian sects? Wouldn't this also be a violation of the monotheism thing?

I know of no Christian sects that consider Satan to be a demi-god. What is your point?

By the way, you should research Jewish Wisdom Theology before making such an ignorant essay as this.

GCT said...

"Christianity is only sort of "monotheistic." Again, "trinitarian" is a much better word."

Ok, so Xianity is not monotheistic. Thank you for your admission.

"Merely saying, "Duh, that doesn't make sense?!!!" does not prove that there is a contradiction here."

It's not a contradiction if you admit that Xianity is not monotheistic, but it is if you continue to assert that it is. Oh, and your three corners of the triangle doesn't work for the reasons I pointed out.

"Ironically, atheism in it's entirety is self-contradictory: it's an orderly appeal to reason for a reasonless universe without order..."

Who said the universe has no order?

"...whose purpose is to evidence that there is no purpose..."

This is non-sensical. There is no purpose to atheism, simply the acknoweldgement that you have no evidence for your god.

"...and whose morality is to argue that we should teach that there are no morals except that which they have reasoned for their purpose..."

Again, this is non-sensical. Apart from the crack about "their purpose" there is no reason why there can not be morality without god.

"...which, in turn, produces the ultimate emotional articulation of self-centeredness..."

Self-centeredness? Why, because I don't believe in god, so therefore I'm self-centered? Huh?

"...which is fearfully bent towards the cover up and suppression of belief..."

I have never, ever advocated suppression of belief. If anything, it is theists that have forever been doing that, with their endless wars to convert the heathen masses.

"...in an ultimate personal cause who brings order, purpose, and judgment to all things."

Got any evidence for this personal cause?

"I know of no Christian sects that consider Satan to be a demi-god. What is your point?"

I asked why this is so, so perhaps that was the point.

"By the way, you should research Jewish Wisdom Theology before making such an ignorant essay as this."

Ignorant? How? You have to admit that the majority of Xians consider themselves monotheistic, even if you don't. This, is a contradiction as that majority also consider god to be three distinct personalities. How is this ignorant? And, considering that the trinity is a Xian concept, I'm not sure why you would harp on about Jewish theology. Further, before you cry "ignorance" you might want to learn something about the atheists/atheism that you seem intent on bashing.

symbiontmusic said...

PAT DUNN SAID:
Symbiont, don't jump to conclusions. Do you really think someone hasn't raised this objection in the two thousand years Christianity has been around?

-What conclusion have I "jumped" to and where did I state that this is the first time someone has pointed this out?
-You just stated in your own very clear words that Christianity is trinitarian.

PAT DUNN SAID:
How in the world is merely saying, "Well, that doesn't make sense," a coherent argument against Christianity?

-It is yet another demonstration in pointing out the obvious contradictions in the Bible/Christianity. But to clear things up a bit more, if this god is so powerful and his word is perfect, how could there ever be any contradictions or incorrect statements in the Bible/Christianity

Anonymous said...

GCT: Although I have great appreciation for your reasoning skills and you provide great food for thought, you have to realize that when debating Patrick Dunnevant, you are dealing with a 19 year old boy/man.

Although I realize that there are many intelligent and well educated 19 year olds, that is far too young for anyone to have experienced much of anything of "real life". Therefore, for the most part, what you are getting from Dunnevant is nothing more that regurgitated education he has received from others.

The thing that most irritates me about Dunevant is that although he comes in the name of Christ, he is every bit as arrogant and attacking as any other who does not "believe" ("... making such an ignorant essay as this") and really hasn't "set himself apart" as being any different "in Christ".

Which, in my mind, only presents more evidence for the necessitity to logically and rationally question the existance of the jewish/christian god.

Patrick Dunnevant said...

Ok, so Xianity is not monotheistic. Thank you for your admission.

Christianity is not "monotheistic" as you and others seem to throw the term around. Christianity is clearly has a different conception of God than Islam, so it's wrong to lump the two in the same category.

Trinitarianism is still not tritheism or polytheism, so don't misunderstand me.


It's not a contradiction if you admit that Xianity is not monotheistic, but it is if you continue to assert that it is.

This statement is what makes me think that you are applying a definition that should be used on Christianity to Christianity.

Oh, and your three corners of the triangle doesn't work for the reasons I pointed out.

What reasons?

"Ironically, atheism in it's entirety is self-contradictory: it's an orderly appeal to reason for a reasonless universe without order..."

Who said the universe has no order?

Have you ever looked in a telescope, by any chance? Stars exploding everywhere? The universe is chaotic.

But apart from that, "order" as it is defined seems to require intelligence. "Order" means "a condition in which each thing is properly disposed with reference to other things and to its purpose; methodical or harmonious arrangement." How can something be "arranged" in such a way without design?


This is non-sensical. There is no purpose to atheism, simply the acknoweldgement that you have no evidence for your god.

So you agree, then?

Again, this is non-sensical. Apart from the crack about "their purpose" there is no reason why there can not be morality without god.

You can act moral if you don't believe in God, certainly. But there cannot be any objective standard of morality if there is nothing objective to ground it in.

Self-centeredness? Why, because I don't believe in god, so therefore I'm self-centered? Huh?

Wow, you completely missed that point. If we were to base morals on instinct and evolution, self-centered morality is entirely what we get.

Why shouldn't you be selfish? Because it's better for the group. Why should you care about what's better for the group? Because it's better for the species. Why should you care about what's better for the species? Because it's better for YOU.

So in other words, you shouldn't be selfish because it's better for you, and allows you to be more thoroughly selfish.


I have never, ever advocated suppression of belief. If anything, it is theists that have forever been doing that, with their endless wars to convert the heathen masses.

Then you seem to be part of a group that's getting smaller and smaller with every passing day. Kudos to you.

Got any evidence for this personal cause?

Plenty.

I asked why this is so, so perhaps that was the point.

But what reason is there to consider satan to be a demi-god, judging by Christian theology?

Ignorant? How?

Well, you don't seem to be familiar with any of the standard defenses of the trinity. Your argument literally consisted of, "That doesn't make sense, therefore it's false."

Ignorance is not an insult, don't get me wrong. It's merely a statement of fact.


You have to admit that the majority of Xians consider themselves monotheistic, even if you don't.

However, I'd bet you that all of those Christians would agree with me when I say that Christianity has a vastly different conception of God than Islam, which is yet also said to be "monotheistic."

I think you interpreted me saying Christianity isn't really "monotheistic" to mean I believe Christianity is polytheism, which is not true at all.


This, is a contradiction as that majority also consider god to be three distinct personalities.

Yes, three beings in one essense.

How is this ignorant?

Because you undoubtedly haven't read any of the defenses and explanations of the doctrine that have been written in the past two thousand years.

And, considering that the trinity is a Xian concept, I'm not sure why you would harp on about Jewish theology.

I'm not "harping" on anything. I'm merely suggesting that you check it out, for it will help your understanding of the doctrine. Christianity developed out of Judaism, after all.

Further, before you cry "ignorance" you might want to learn something about the atheists/atheism that you seem intent on bashing.

I've been debating atheism for years now. I think I'm aware of how it goes.

Patrick Dunnevant said...

Symbiont,

-What conclusion have I "jumped" to and where did I state that this is the first time someone has pointed this out?

"There are no comments because this point cannot be argued!"

This contains two conclusions that were jumped to WAY too soon:

1) That the reason there are no comments is because we can't respond. Rather, the more likely reason is because the post was relatively new, and the blog doesn't receive very much activity.

2) That this sort of point hasn't been debated, discussed, and refuted for the past thousand years.


-You just stated in your own very clear words that Christianity is trinitarian.

...Yes? What are you saying? Is it normal for Christians to not be trinitarians, symbiont?

-It is yet another demonstration in pointing out the obvious contradictions in the Bible/Christianity.

And yet, for those of us who do our research, the only thing obvious about this is that you're misunderstanding it.

But to clear things up a bit more, if this god is so powerful and his word is perfect, how could there ever be any contradictions or incorrect statements in the Bible/Christianity

This statement assumes that God literally dictated every single word of it, which is an idea that is untenable if one actually reads anything in it.

- All the books would have the same writing style and speech pattern.
- None of the books would ever say anything like, "Why do you hide from me Oh lord?" or "This is my opinion, not God's," as Paul says many times.

Patrick Dunnevant said...

Anonymous,

You do realize that everything in there is merely the fallacy of poisoning the well, since you did not address a single argument I made and instead referred to my age and mannerisms instead?

I find it odd that you claim that I haven't experienced "real life," when you have most likely never met me or spoken to me before. You most likely have merely read a few things I've written.

What in the world would you say "real life" is? What is the point in life where I can turn around and say, "You know what? I think I've finally experienced life!" This line is never actually drawn whenever atheists make this sort of argument against me, and believe me, it's happened before. I'm looking forward to you clarifying this for me, since you've obviously experienced life in such a way that you're able to deem whether or not my life is fulfilled without actually knowing anything about me.

As I've said before, calling someone "ignorant" is not arrogant. It is merely a statement of fact. If you are ignorant, you are simply uninformed or have a misunderstanding of something, and that is simply that. I won't pretend that someone is more intelligent or more informed than they actually are, especially not in a debate of this importance. I would be patronizing them otherwise, and I'm sure you wouldn't like it if I did that.

On your point of being "Christ-like," go read Matthew 23 and tell me what you think. But even if that weren't actually in the Bible, even if Jesus didn't have very harsh words for those guys, much harsher than anything I've said here, why in the world would my actions somehow evidence the idea that Christianity is false?

Anonymous said...

Patrick Dunnevant said...
Anonymous,

"I find it odd that you claim that I haven't experienced 'real life,' ... What in the world would you say 'real life' is? What is the point in life where I can turn around and say, 'You know what? I think I've finally experienced life!'"

Your response clearly shows your immaturity and lack of experience. I'll not debate an arrogant "parrot" (and I now believe, asshole)

GCT said...

"Trinitarianism is still not tritheism or polytheism, so don't misunderstand me."

So, then you do have cognitive dissonance.

"What reasons?"

Sorry about that, I thought I had explained more in the OP. Xians generally believe that the three entities are separate and able to function quite independently of one another. So, either god is three distinct entities and Xianity is polytheistic, or god has multiple personality disorder.

"Have you ever looked in a telescope, by any chance? Stars exploding everywhere? The universe is chaotic."

Except that those physical interactions happen according to physical laws.

"But apart from that, "order" as it is defined seems to require intelligence."

No, actually it doesn't. Take evolution for example.

"So you agree, then?"

No, I don't. Don't impart a purpose on something that simply isn't there.

"You can act moral if you don't believe in God, certainly. But there cannot be any objective standard of morality if there is nothing objective to ground it in."

This is quite a different statement from your original. Do you rescind your original statement?

"Wow, you completely missed that point. If we were to base morals on instinct and evolution, self-centered morality is entirely what we get."

In some ways, yes. However, giving up something for the group because I realize that it will be beneficial for me in the long run does not make me more self-centered. And, you seem to admit that there are evolutionary patterns to our morality, which should make it hard for you to argue for god. Further, god lays down his rules, which we now find immoral. Morality has and does evolve and god's absolute morality is not as moral as ours today.

"Then you seem to be part of a group that's getting smaller and smaller with every passing day. Kudos to you."

Nice back-handed compliment, however I defy you to back up your argument with some evidence.

"Plenty."

Yet, none of it is forthcoming.

"But what reason is there to consider satan to be a demi-god, judging by Christian theology?"

Because Satan has many of the powers of god and talks to god as an equal.

"Well, you don't seem to be familiar with any of the standard defenses of the trinity. Your argument literally consisted of, "That doesn't make sense, therefore it's false.""

I'm familiar with some of them and they aren't very compelling, because they tend to boil down to, "Well, we just believe," or, "god is mysterious and we can't understand how this obvious contradiction isn't." And, it doesn't take a sophisticated argument to point to an obvious contradiction and say, "Um, what gives?"

"However, I'd bet you that all of those Christians would agree with me when I say that Christianity has a vastly different conception of God than Islam, which is yet also said to be "monotheistic.""

Monotheistic = one god. Whether that god is allah or jehovah matters not to the definition of the word.

"Christianity developed out of Judaism, after all."

And Judaism has no concept of a trinity.

"I've been debating atheism for years now. I think I'm aware of how it goes."

Then you have either not listened to your opponents to learn their actual positions, or you have not cared enough to represent those opinions honestly. To me, your statement means you don't have much excuse for the strawmen that you've posted and the inaccuracies in the position to ascribe to all atheists. It's sloppy and intellectually dishonest.

"And yet, for those of us who do our research, the only thing obvious about this is that you're misunderstanding it."

What you mean to say here is that for those of you who believe in the doctrine and believe it is not contradictory. People have twisted religious doctrine to suit their cognitive dissonance for much longer that Xianity has been around. For instance, take the obvious contradiction between god being omni-benevolent and the existence of hell, or the contradiction between free will and god's omni-max nature. Those are obvious examples.

"This statement assumes that God literally dictated every single word of it, which is an idea that is untenable if one actually reads anything in it."

I would agree that it's quite ludicrous to think that god dictated the words of the Bible. However, the general feeling among Xians is that it is inspired by god (which is similarly ludicrous). This argument is still defeated by the fact that god seems to not have very good editorial control over his own book.

"You do realize that everything in there is merely the fallacy of poisoning the well, since you did not address a single argument I made and instead referred to my age and mannerisms instead?"

I think the point was that Anon. wanted me to take into consideration your young age and place in life. I know that teenagers are the smartest people in the world and know everything there is to know, but there is always more learning to be had. I've decided not to treat you any differently than I would any other opponent, mostly because you've asked for that.

symbiontmusic said...

-PAT DUNN


"There are no comments because this point cannot be argued!"

My comment did exactly what I intended...... To make a Christian speak up.


...Yes? What are you saying? Is it normal for Christians to not be trinitarians, symbiont?

I was not clear enough on this.

-of or referring to the Trinity, the union of three persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) in one nature as God

I am not sure how "tri" anything can have any resemblance to the belief in ONE god. While I do not know every word & verse in the bible, I know that christians believe in one god, and there is no intelligent logic behind "IT'S 3 N 1". It's god the father, god the son, god the holy spirit. That is 3 gods. Each with there own purpose. Why else have 3?

PAT DUNN:
And yet, for those of us who do our research, the only thing obvious about this is that you're misunderstanding it.

And this is the normal response by a Christian. But yet, it seems pretty clear to me and also to a lot more people.

PAT DUNN:
This statement assumes that God literally dictated every single word of it, which is an idea that is untenable if one actually reads anything in it.

I have never read in the bible or heard a Christian say any thing short of "this is gods word, directly from god". That meaning there are no falsities. A Christian must assume because there are many contradictions in the book. You are saying with this comment that a Christian should assume that god did not control the writings in the bible, and if that is the case, how does one decide which is true or false? Oh yeah, by faith. Which means that all in the bible is correct, and one must just understand it correctly.

Are you actually a Christian? I am picking up that you have doubts based on your statements. Especially this one:

"This statement assumes that God literally dictated every single word of it, which is an idea that is untenable if one actually reads anything in it.

- All the books would have the same writing style and speech pattern.
- None of the books would ever say anything like, "Why do you hide from me Oh lord?" or "This is my opinion, not God's," as Paul says many times."

Wallis said...

The correct word is "persona." It comes from Greek theater when the actors carried full-body characaters of the parts they played. The audience could readily see who was the villain, the hero, the heroine, the father, the mother,etc.

Christianity has developed three personas of God: the Creator, the Savior, and the Comforter.

Hindus have hundreds of icons that they pray to, yet they claim that there is only one God. Each icon represents a persona of God for each particular problem in life.

So, instead of troubling the whole God with a specific problem, a Hindu will use the icon to concentrate his prayers to the persona of God that will deal directly with his problem.

GCT said...

Wallis, this does nothing to explain away the paradox. Your answer is that god is simply one being, but many Xians would disagree with you on that score.