MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)

[DeistPaladin]

I think that the "god as a title" thing can work if we treat it thusly: there can be many senators, but they are part of only one senate. Thus there are many, and there is one.

If we're changing the definition of "God" to being a title or, in the case of your Senate analogy, a collection of divine beings that created and manage the universe, we already have a word for that.

We call that a "pantheon".

The Greek gods, like your Senate analogy, were many members of a group of divine beings that lived on Olympus. They were many but they were also part of the same pantheon. Shifting the definition of "God" to replace "pantheon" is playing a game of slight-of-hand to mask the polytheistic nature of Christianity.

But then again, that's the real reason we have the Trinity, now isn't it?

Let's be honest. The real explanation for the Trinity that everyone can understand is early Christian theologians were wrestling with a core problem with Christology that they couldn't solve. Jesus forgave sins and Christians pray to him. If he is not a god, then he can't legitimately forgive sins or offer salvation. If he is a god, then he is in conflict with strict Jewish monotheism, especially in his role as intercessor for a god who specifically forbade such a practice in his first commandment.

Such is the price for a synchratic theology of different pagan and Jewish ideas rammed together to give birth to a patchwork religion. Christianity's greatest strength, it's marketing capabilities with its slick incorporation of local pagan ideas and customs, is also its greatest weakness if inspected too closely (or at all). It's just how it is with multiple script writers working in a science fiction TV series: continuity gaffes slip in to the story line which must be rationalized away by studious fanfic writers. The only problem is this one is a beaut. This gaffe is central to the entire story: what is Jesus exactly?

Unable to answer this question in a satisfying way and squaring it with their belief of Christ being the savior, they apparently went for the "he's-both-yet-neither" solution. He is one with his father and yet separate from his father. He is fully divine and yet also fully human. They are three beings and yet just one god. It's a round square, a curved straight line, an invisible purple nothing.

This highly buggy fix is like the emperor walking buck naked down the street as all true believers pretend they see his clothing. "Why can't you get it? Three separate beings in one god." They babble on with conviction as if they've stated that water is wet and the sky is blue. What else can we expect? The greatest Christian minds for 2000 years have already wrestled with this puzzle and come up empty handed. How is an amateur apologist wannabe trying to cut his teeth in the lion's den going to do any better but fall on his face while abusing the laughing icon?

But still, I can't help asking. Maybe it's my mother's influence as a psychologist. The delusional architecture is perplexing.