In order to believe in the nature of Trinity, you must first believe that there is a single God. Do you believe that? Let's make it easier, are you willing to accept the assumption that there is a God? This is serious. Once you accept the assumption, then you can not negate it in any of your later argument.

Are you willing to accept the assumption that there is ONE God, and ONLY ONE God?

Edited by Juvenissun, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 434 by ringo, posted 07-21-2020 9:28 AM		ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 439 by Phat, posted 08-07-2020 9:45 AM	Juvenissun has replied
	Message 444 by ringo, posted 08-07-2020 1:02 PM	Juvenissun has not replied

Juvenissun

Member (Idle past 1659 days)

Posts: 332

Joined: 07-25-2020

Normal Thread Display

Message 440 of 1864 (880538)
08-07-2020 10:09 AM

Reply to: Message 439 by Phat
08-07-2020 9:45 AM

Re: Topic Synopsis

ringo likely believes that there is no "evidence" of any gods. He believes in human potential as the only thing that really matters and that we can test and measure.

In order to argue about anything related to God, one first NEEDS to assume that there is a God. Otherwise, where is the base for any follow-up argument?

This message is a reply to:
	Message 439 by Phat, posted 08-07-2020 9:45 AM		Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 441 by Phat, posted 08-07-2020 10:17 AM	Juvenissun has replied
	Message 443 by ringo, posted 08-07-2020 12:49 PM	Juvenissun has replied

Juvenissun

Member (Idle past 1659 days)

Posts: 332

Joined: 07-25-2020

Normal Thread Display

Message 445 of 1864 (880559)
08-07-2020 2:16 PM

Reply to: Message 443 by ringo
08-07-2020 12:49 PM

Re: Topic Synopsis

Obviously not. We can argue about Frodo without assuming that Frodo exists.

That is true. But in this Trinity issue, the question is NOT if God exists, but is "Is God one or three"?.

Do you see God is already assumed to exist in the question? If you say: God does not exist. Then you can leave this thread alone.

If you want to explore the Trinity, then you MUST assume at least one God exists. Can you see what you have to deal with in this issue is a logic question, not a theological question?

You assume God exists, then we can talk about Trinity.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 443 by ringo, posted 08-07-2020 12:49 PM		ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 454 by ringo, posted 08-07-2020 9:26 PM		Juvenissun has replied

Juvenissun

Member (Idle past 1659 days)

Posts: 332

Joined: 07-25-2020

Normal Thread Display

Message 446 of 1864 (880560)
08-07-2020 2:19 PM

Reply to: Message 441 by Phat
08-07-2020 10:17 AM

Re: Topic Synopsis

Do you know what God would say were it He and I?

Sorry, I did not read early postings. I do not understand the question.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 441 by Phat, posted 08-07-2020 10:17 AM		Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 447 by Phat, posted 08-07-2020 4:04 PM		Juvenissun has replied

Juvenissun

Member (Idle past 1659 days)

Posts: 332

Joined: 07-25-2020

Normal Thread Display

Message 452 of 1864 (880582)
08-07-2020 6:43 PM

Reply to: Message 447 by Phat
08-07-2020 4:04 PM

Re: Topic Synopsis

Basically I am asking if you as a believer can speak on behalf of God. Critics despise apologists because they claim that apologists make up random stuff and in essence claim to speak on Gods behalf. Philosophically I see no reason why you can't. Scientifically is another issue, however. Science is science and is based on testable logic. Even if God could change the rules of logic, it does not appear that He does so.

Have you heard people usually say: Because God says so and so, so that this and that should be true.

Do you think that person is speaking for God?

Definitely not. God's words give us basic data. We use logic to elaborate it and show something hidden in the words. We do not speak FOR God, we are trying to use tools (logic) God gives us to "understand" God. You can have your logic and I can have mine. So, to the same verse, we could have different understanding. And that is GOOD.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 447 by Phat, posted 08-07-2020 4:04 PM		Phat has seen this message but not replied

Juvenissun

Member (Idle past 1659 days)

Posts: 332

Joined: 07-25-2020

Normal Thread Display

Message 453 of 1864 (880583)
08-07-2020 6:46 PM

Reply to: Message 451 by Phat
08-07-2020 4:22 PM

Re: Topic Synopsis

even philosophy must bow to logic and evidence

To me, philosophy is no more than logic. Correct me with an example if I were wrong.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 451 by Phat, posted 08-07-2020 4:22 PM		Phat has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 457 by PaulK, posted 08-08-2020 12:38 AM		Juvenissun has replied

Juvenissun

Member (Idle past 1659 days)

Posts: 332

Joined: 07-25-2020

Normal Thread Display

Message 458 of 1864 (880617)
08-08-2020 9:15 AM

Reply to: Message 457 by PaulK
08-08-2020 12:38 AM

Re: Topic Synopsis

Where does philosophy get it’s starting premises from? Logic needs premises but gives you none to begin with.

You are right. Logic is a tool to process other thing, in philosophy, it is idea, any idea.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 457 by PaulK, posted 08-08-2020 12:38 AM		PaulK has not replied

Juvenissun

Member (Idle past 1659 days)

Posts: 332

Joined: 07-25-2020

Normal Thread Display

Message 459 of 1864 (880618)
08-08-2020 9:17 AM

Reply to: Message 454 by ringo
08-07-2020 9:26 PM

Re: Topic Synopsis

To me, the question is whether or not the Bible supports the Trinity.

OK, that is a much simpler case.
Jesus says: My Father and I are one.
What does that say to you about the Trinity?

This message is a reply to:
	Message 454 by ringo, posted 08-07-2020 9:26 PM		ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 460 by ringo, posted 08-08-2020 12:23 PM		Juvenissun has replied

Juvenissun

Member (Idle past 1659 days)

Posts: 332

Joined: 07-25-2020

Normal Thread Display

Message 463 of 1864 (880640)
08-08-2020 7:30 PM

Reply to: Message 460 by ringo
08-08-2020 12:23 PM

Re: Topic Synopsis

For one thing, it says two, not three - it may be support for a Binity.

Very good. We have two.
If A=B and B=C, would you agree that A=B=C?
the Bible also says many times:
God's Spirit IS God.
I think this is a much more common concept. Deity usually has "spirit" which is another form of the deity who can reach out. Right?

What do you say now?

Edited by Juvenissun, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 460 by ringo, posted 08-08-2020 12:23 PM		ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 466 by ringo, posted 08-08-2020 9:40 PM		Juvenissun has replied

Juvenissun

Member (Idle past 1659 days)

Posts: 332

Joined: 07-25-2020

Normal Thread Display

Message 468 of 1864 (880670)
08-09-2020 9:34 AM

Reply to: Message 466 by ringo
08-08-2020 9:40 PM

Re: Topic Synopsis

That doesn't help the case for the Trinity. A, B and C are all separate entities. You're trying to prove that 1+1+1=3.

No. Of course not. "Spirit" is an aspect of deity, not a separate deity.

the Bible says:
Jesus IS God; and
Spirit IS God.
That is enough. Whether this means one or three, it does not matter.

"When you see God, you are not really seeing God, but seeing the spirit of God." Does this statement make sense? Spirit is not an aspect (part) of God. Spirit and God are separable. That is why the Spirit is needed. Otherwise, God does not need Spirit.

Anyway, you want to see what the Bible says. And that is what the Bible says. It satisfied your question no matter you believe it or not.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 466 by ringo, posted 08-08-2020 9:40 PM		ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 470 by ringo, posted 08-09-2020 3:30 PM	Juvenissun has not replied
	Message 471 by harpo, posted 06-18-2021 10:23 PM	Juvenissun has not replied