Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The Absurb Trinity Doctrine - embarassament of theology

  1. Jun 3, 2003 #1

    A pastor preached that trinity is very logical, he said, if god was one person, after incarnation to become man, who will control the universe? Therefore, trinity solves this problem, the Son became flesh, and the Father was still in heaven to control and uphold the universe. Very logic, he said!

    This is bullsheet!

    First, let me tell you what is automation.
    I graduated engineering, worked in factory before, dealt with automated machines like CNC. With microprocessor, sensors, PLC and all sorts of things, a machine can be automated and run on itself without supervision after you have set its settings. You can walked away to do other things and let the machine continue to operate.

    So, the christians claim that their God is OMNIPOTENT, he can do whatever possible, nothing is impossible with him.
    We have seen that even the fragile human (compared to the so-called God) can invent and make a machine to run automatically, why not God is able to incarnate as man, at the same time enable the universe to operate on itself? He is omnipotent, can he do that? If can, then trinity is false. If can not, then God is not omnipotent.

    I read books, talked with christians, until now, no books, no christian can fully explain the trinity logically to me.
    Some say trinity is like water, can be solid ice, liquid water, and gaseous vapor, after all, it is still H2O.

    Ha ha, the word trinity is not vividly mentioned in bible, when people thought more about its teaching, inquired about the nature of Jesus, then the council of christianity decided to enact Creed to incorporate trinity into their faith. Just a man-made theory based on the ambiguity of bible.

  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 3, 2003 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    But for how long?

    Half right. Omnipotence is the power to do anything possible. Any other definition is simply nonsensical.

    So you have a problem with man-made theories?
  4. Jun 3, 2003 #3
    Trinity logic

  5. Jun 3, 2003 #4
    I think that the pastor over simplified it somewhat. IMO the Trinity are facets of the one God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
    Not unlike the fact that I am a husband, father and grandfather amoung other things. They are each different manifestations of the same being with different functions and properties. I personally don't believe that Jesus, while a son of God, is/was not the Son of the Trinity; but, that is purely a personal belief. If that is the case there would be know conflict of purpose.
  6. Jun 3, 2003 #5

    When some people are claiming they are divine, then I have a problem.
  7. Jun 3, 2003 #6
    where does JC claim to "BE" god in the bible???

    son of man is the title he used

    trinity is a very strange idea
    1 does that mean when JC prayed he prayed to himself????
    2 when god spoke to JC and others at the river saying "behold my son...ect" then he was speaking of and to himself???
    3 was it realy nessary for JC to leave earth before the holy spirit could be brought down to man???? ie god cann't be two places or things at once???????
    4 can god, JC, and, the holy spirit all be in one place or at three places at the same time. or just one place for one form at any one time and the most powerfull being cann't multi-task??????
    5 is the holy spirit equaly limited to only acting with one person at one time?? or can there be more than one spirit??
    6 why is this three godded system called monotheisum, remember we havenot counted the dark side or the angels or mary or saints yet
    at minimum it is a dualest system even without a schychiod 3 part godhead+mary =5 major gods plus many minor ones
  8. Jun 3, 2003 #7
    Ok saint here goes bud, the father is the conciousness throughout the universe, the son is all of creation moon sun people dirt tangible and the holy spirt is what make the universe move as modern day physics will soon find out. The names have been changed to protect the innocent. I am catholic, but put it all on the line in 1987 for a real answer. Can you tell the difference between a real answer and carp? Your right most of them don't know, but guess what neither do the phyicacists know what gravity is or universal theory. They hear and parrot just like everyone else. This I know because I know what gravity is. I discovered it for myself in 1991.

    It's not about fields of knowlege, it's about people. Some understand and some do not. All have the capacity to understand it, they just have not been put in a position for it to be used. This is reality. So, am I full of carp?

    I have a post on the fish or fish bowls or the bowlless fish bowl or is it the bowl without fish. Carp, anyway I was looking for methods of proof your opinion towards the end of the posts would be welcome.
  9. Jun 4, 2003 #8


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Ahh, so the Holy Spirit is responsible for all movement in the universe???

    Hmm. So when I start my car, step on the accelerator, and the internal combustion engine is not responsible for my movement, but the holy ghost is?

    Or even better, A star explodes and sends stuff flying in every direction. It is not the force from the explosion, but the Holy ghost who moves this stuff? Or are you saying that the holy ghost is the explosion?

    Hey, maybe thats what Dark Matter is. Genius, pure genius.
  10. Jun 5, 2003 #9
    Why shouting, megashawn? What he means is that laws of nature, math, logic itself is da holy spirit. Try arguing that these things aren't behind it all.
  11. Jun 5, 2003 #10
    Give da man a cigar. When you make this breakthrough you will understand the other things which are possible in the universe and only then. So you think I am full or carp, I have been eating sardines lately.

    There is not supernatural, only natural, but what is natural extends beyond the boundaries of what many think. I don't believe it, I have seen it.
  12. Jun 5, 2003 #11


    User Avatar

    Try proving it either.
    And I don't think that the laws of the universe are equvivalent to the conscious entity we normally understand and define as the holy spirit... Maths certainly does not take the shape of doves and fly onto people's heads. Much as Alexander might disagree. :wink:
  13. Jun 5, 2003 #12
    Ok, give me a list of things which you would consider proof that there is more than a material world. If you don't I will take it as an admission that you really don't have a mind and it is just a figment of your chemical reaction. I know your a good sport so help me out. I already have one idea, but I consider it to be the best way to prove events which are not neccessarily repeatable.
  14. Jun 6, 2003 #13


    User Avatar

    TENYEARS: Perform one random and completely acausal act.
  15. Jun 6, 2003 #14
    For one don't use big words on me because I am not sure of the meaning of the word acausal. As for a random act, there has never been one in the history of infinity so not only can't there be one, it would actually disprove what I am saying if I could. Why would a random act prove the existence of anything beyond a chemical reaction or what I am trying to say? What is your logic? It definitely contrdicts mine 100%.

    Ah and da light goes on. And that my friends is why I or anyone else should not post logic, read logic or anything else for that matter. Too many people like to eat the frosting and nobody likes cake. First the olives and leaves the cucumbers.
  16. Jun 7, 2003 #15


    User Avatar

    Because that is what chemical reactions are. They are a case of simple cause and effect. They are manifestation of material causes leading to what we consider spiritual, or immaterial, like your mind. If you show that there is such a thing as a truely random action (not just too complex for us to find reasons), then this is one thing that chemical reactions or physical reactions don't allow. If this something is acausal, it must be something outside of reductionist science, and materialist knowledge.

    However, if you say that you believe that no random acts exist, they you mean that an innate law, a meaningful, understandable laws governs everything. That produces the mind and what we call free will etc. In which case, you are not arguing against a materialist world at all. You are arguing for a materialist world where not everything is found yet. You are in fact arguing for what is the essence of materialist science, wrapped up in a apparently spiritualist wrapper. It's chemical reactions in all but name.
  17. Jun 8, 2003 #16
    FZ, to parla American? If you use your memory there has never been a single post of mine on either forum which ever contradicted the so called material world. Let me ask you this question, what do you think grace is? The bible is a treaty on life and does not contadict reality. They are unquestionably the same and in accordance with all the rules.

    Spirituality is a treaty on physics with out expensive equipment uniiversities and large corporate payoffs.

    I swear if I wrote down all that happened to me how what triggered it and how I percieved it worked, it would blow your mind and yet it would be accepted because of the nature of it's function and the way it works can be understood. If not that, proved.

    Ok, since you have given me responses in the past, I would like to send you a question which I have thought could prove what I speak. You must not speak of it to anyone but can reply to me. If you want the question let me know either message or post here.
  18. Jun 8, 2003 #17


    User Avatar

    Ok, I'm game.

    I didn't say you contradict the material world. I say that your idea that materialists are fish or whatever isn't right, because you fail to understand the nature of materialist thought itself. Ie. while you ridicule that the mind can simply be chemical reactions, you miss that chemical reactions are what you then suggest the mind to be.

    As to your idea on spirituality... well, it isn't what most people consider it to be.
  19. Jun 8, 2003 #18
    As for the fish thing, I am afraid I do not deny my subconcious when it speaks like this. It was the tankless tank that was relevant.

    The last line I never said and makes all the difference. I realized this when I was 15. Kinda, shoots down the old young kid and wisdom thing to some degree. Thing is I knew it was not understood by those around me so I said nothing. This would be respect for ones elders and compasion for those who did not understand. At the same time I also realized that the capability for all to understand was always with them.
  20. Jun 27, 2003 #19
    bible and the trinity

    If anyone has ever actually read the bible, then they have to admit that the concept of a trinity is Absurd. if Jesus was God, then how can he have died? And just saying that his body died, not his mind. soul is not going to cut it here. If Jesus died, he had to DIE, cease to exsist. Otherwise there can be no redemption through his death.

    Not only this, but in the bible there was always a nice hirachal structure with God at the top. When it talkes of the kingdom, and the time to come etc, it even has Jesus handing over the kingdom to God, then being rulled over by him. Now, if they were all the one person, how can one part of God rule over another part? it cant! It is just as stupid as to suggest that one form of H2O is more mighty than another form. It is ridiculious.

    If you want to argue that Jesus calls himself God many times, i would refer you to the fact that he also tells the whole of Israel that they are all Gods. This concept is widly misused. There is nothing to suggest the existance of the trinity in the bible, it was, as the original post said, created by a council in 450ad. long after the fact.
  21. Jun 30, 2003 #20
    Yea i was talking to a christian about this. I think they realized that if god is god and jesus is god then they are polythesitic so they came up with this
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook