RE: The Trinity
January 23, 2021 at 12:42 am
(This post was last modified: January 23, 2021 at 1:07 am by The Grand Nudger.)
We could asks the catholics directly, who have this to say.
-and this is pretty much always a good place to start, if you want to have a conversation about a subject like this. It helps you to be familiar with positions and the use of terms that aren't strictly your own.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trini...understood.
It would seem as though you're representing the bolded content, which ofc can't be the explanation for the other. It would be an explanation for another thing. What you believe the thing really meant - trinitarian doctrine having been wrong. The incomprehensibility and rational inaccessibility of the trinity is a feature of trinitarian doctrine, not a bug. A statement of exactly what they believe, not what they got wrong. Truth in advertising. An honest ask. There are far more uncharitable ways to phrase it, but I think that captures what I'm trying to express.
It's also a blisteringly simple and effective rebuttal to any of the objections to the doctrine in thread, btw.
Does it appear to be inaccessible by reason alone? Sure does, they agree. Does it seem pagan? So what if it did, it's still what they believe and seeming pagan doesn't make things false. It's untrue? Can't be, it's revealed by god. Each of these is present in the literature concurrent with the assumption of the belief or, as may be the case, prior to the assumption of the belief in the community. When these trinitarians are the last man standing in the 400's, do we think that theology progressed on account of the people before having died and taken their anti-trinitarian beliefs with them, and now, trinitarians are doing the same with respect to non trinitarians? This was an interesting possibility that you brought up which I'd love to explore.
Ties directly into a difference in how we deal with the relationship between theology and reason from one moment or one region to the next. Do we, as was once hoped, use theology to reform our reason - or have we given reason pride of place to reform our theology? Order of commitments and all that.
Quote:The Trinity is a mystery of faith in the strict sense, one of the "mysteries that are hidden in God, which can never be known unless they are revealed by God".58 To be sure, God has left traces of his Trinitarian being in his work of creation and in his Revelation throughout the Old Testament. But his inmost Being as Holy Trinity is a mystery that is inaccessible to reason alone or even to Israel's faith before the Incarnation of God's Son and the sending of the Holy Spirit.https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a...s2c1p2.htm
-and this is pretty much always a good place to start, if you want to have a conversation about a subject like this. It helps you to be familiar with positions and the use of terms that aren't strictly your own.
Quote:After its formulation and imperial enforcement towards the end of the fourth century, this sort of Christian theology reigned more or less unchallenged. But before this, and again in post-Reformation modernity, the origin, meaning, and justification of trinitarian doctrine has been repeatedly disputed.b-mine
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trini...understood.
It would seem as though you're representing the bolded content, which ofc can't be the explanation for the other. It would be an explanation for another thing. What you believe the thing really meant - trinitarian doctrine having been wrong. The incomprehensibility and rational inaccessibility of the trinity is a feature of trinitarian doctrine, not a bug. A statement of exactly what they believe, not what they got wrong. Truth in advertising. An honest ask. There are far more uncharitable ways to phrase it, but I think that captures what I'm trying to express.
It's also a blisteringly simple and effective rebuttal to any of the objections to the doctrine in thread, btw.
Does it appear to be inaccessible by reason alone? Sure does, they agree. Does it seem pagan? So what if it did, it's still what they believe and seeming pagan doesn't make things false. It's untrue? Can't be, it's revealed by god. Each of these is present in the literature concurrent with the assumption of the belief or, as may be the case, prior to the assumption of the belief in the community. When these trinitarians are the last man standing in the 400's, do we think that theology progressed on account of the people before having died and taken their anti-trinitarian beliefs with them, and now, trinitarians are doing the same with respect to non trinitarians? This was an interesting possibility that you brought up which I'd love to explore.
Ties directly into a difference in how we deal with the relationship between theology and reason from one moment or one region to the next. Do we, as was once hoped, use theology to reform our reason - or have we given reason pride of place to reform our theology? Order of commitments and all that.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
