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

[DeistPaladin]

Again, the Trinity doctrine is not a concept of the three sharing the same "being".

Fine, if we agree these are different beings, then you agree that you are a polytheist.

Three divine beings = three gods = polytheism.

It is a title which represents who he is ...

I've argued with many apologists and you are so far the only one who refers to "God" as a title. The dictionary itself is unaware of your unique definition of the term.

Even allowing for your redefinition, you lose. You've redefined "God" to mean "your pantheon". Your pantheon contains three separate beings. These beings have all the features we associate with gods (immortal, powerful, etc.) and they "share a divine nature" according to you. This makes them gods. Your pantheon has three gods.

You're a polytheist, like it or not.

Try as you might, you can't make 3 = 1.

and it [the term God] can sometimes be used synonymously as a name for the "Father".

So he IS the same being as his father? If he assumes the same name he is either masquarading as his father (a liar) or he is the one and the same with his father (same being).

But either way, I am through with you on this subject.

Hey, don't blame me because your philosophy is incoherent causing you frustration when I won't accept your vapid nonsense "three persons in one god" attempt at an answer.

---

Yes, I have seen that video, and yes he is promoting Earl Doherty's position.

Fine. Then demolish it if the case is so flimsy as you seem to think.

Dismissing it with a hand waving gesture is a vapid ad hominem.