RE: The Trinity Doctrine: Help me out, Christians
January 31, 2018 at 8:07 pm
(This post was last modified: January 31, 2018 at 8:22 pm by GrandizerII.)
(January 31, 2018 at 1:21 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:(January 31, 2018 at 1:18 pm)Grandizer Wrote: Except it's not the same as trying to comprehend a different dimension. I can comprehend a fourth dimension just fine, (and appreciate it as logically possible) it's the visualizing part that is impossible.
The Trinity, on the other hand, I can't even conceive of as logically possible. If A, B, and C are each D, then A = B = C = D, but per Trinity doctrine, A and B and C are not equal to each other, even though they are each equal to D. Seems like it's clearly violating an axiom or two.
Really? That's interesting. I certainly can't comprehend a different dimension at all.
I'm sure you can do it if you give it some thought.
Think of time as the fourth dimension. Right now, let's say you're at t = 345. After a little while from now, you'll be at a different t that is a few numbers higher (say, 367, for example).
Now, think of parallel universes. That might be an indicator of an even higher-level dimension.
Either way, dealing cognitively with higher dimensions is not the same as dealing cognitively with the Trinity. Even if you can't comprehend the fourth dimension or higher, as long as they're not logically problematic, then this is just a problem of limited human intuition. The Trinity is different; not only is it counterintuitive, it violates logic.
(January 31, 2018 at 3:00 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: I don't think that the doctrine of the Trinity was deduced logically, but rather it is observed in scripture.
I would say there was some logical derivation (or rather an attempt at it) that happened, using premises in the Scriptures. It's just that the conclusion itself defies logic.
Quote:That God is three and God is one. I don't understand what you are trying to logically make sense of.... I think that you may be trying to use the wrong tool. However I think you did well in your description.
You don't see how the way I described the Trinity (which you agree is an apt description) defies logic?
If F = G, and S = G, and H = G, is it true that F = S = H?