Evidence for God from Science

I figure this would be a good topic to discuss seeing as it has come up several times, and while discussions have evolved, I'm not sure a logical and concise explanation of a Trinitarian position has been forthcoming. What is meant by three but one God, and how can such an idea be seen as coherent? It is my intention to share some knowledge and reasoning about the Trinity in what I consider to be a great foundation.

Now I have come to appreciate a form of Social Trinitarianism, which basically means there are three distinct centers of self-consciousness (i.e., persons), each with their own proper intellect and will who are related to each other in such a way as to form one single entity (i.e., God). Now some, especially non-Christians, would charge that Social Trinitarianism is incoherent and falls into Tritheism. Is it incoherent though? There are a few forms of Social Trinitarianism, but the one I will dig into here is Trinity Monotheism. This position holds that while the persons of the Trinity are each divine, the Trinity as a whole is properly God. However, the question then arises that if each person is not a full instance of God, in what way can each person be individually divine? William Lane Craig and J.P. Moreland provide the following analogy in response:

One way of being feline is to instantiate the nature of a cat. But there are other ways to be feline as well. A cat's DNA or skeleton is feline, even if neither is a cat. Nor is this a sort of downgraded or attenuated felinity: A cat's skeleton is fully and unambiguously feline. Indeed, a cat just is a feline animal, as a cat's skeleton is a feline skeleton. Now if a cat is feline in virtue of being an instance of the cat nature, in virtue of what is a cat's DNA or skeleton feline? One plausible answer is that they are parts of a cat. This suggests that we could think of the persons of the Trinity as divine because they are parts of the Trinity, that is, part of God. Now obviously, the persons are not parts of God in the sense in which a skeleton is part of a cat; but given that the Father, for example, is not the whole Godhead, it seems undeniable that there is some sort of part-whole relation obtaining between the persons of the Trinity and the entire Godhead.

However, doesn't this part-whole relation view downgrade the divinity of persons? To this question Craig and Moreland continue their response:

Far from downgrading the divinity of the persons, such an account can be very illuminating of their contribution to the divine nature. For parts can possess properties which the whole does not, and the whole can have a property because some part has it. Thus, when we ascribe omniscience and omnipotence to God..., God has these properties because the persons do. Divine attributes like omniscience, omnipotence and goodness are grounded in the persons' possessing these properties, while divine attributes like necessity, aseity and eternity are not so grounded. With respect to the latter, the persons have these properties because God as a whole has them. For parts can have some properties in virtue of the whole of which they are parts. The point is that if we think of divinity of the persons in terms of a part-whole relation to the Trinity that God is, then, their deity seems in no way diminished because they are not instances of the divine nature.

Now the Trinitarian Monotheism explanation presents a coherent doctrine of the Trinity. It avoids the contradictory position Jehovah's Witnesses charge Trinitarian Christians with, which is that we believe there is only one God and three Gods. For what is actually being said is that there are three persons who make up the one and only God. Muslims (and others) would no doubt still charge Trinitarian Monotheists (TMs) with believing in three Gods, seeing as TMs believe each person within the Godhead has their own consciousness. Craig and Moreland recognise this and respond by way of an analogy to the question, "What is the salient difference between three divine persons who are each a being [tritheism] and three divine persons who are together one being? [Trinitarian Monotheism]?":

In Greco-Roman mythology there is said to stand guarding the gates of Hades a three-headed dog name Cerberus. We may suppose that Cerberus has three brains and therefore three distinct states of consciousness of whatever it is like to be a dog. Therefore, Cerberus, while a sentient being, does not have a unified consciousness. He has three consciousnesses. We could even assign proper names to each of them: Rover, Bowser and Spike... Despite the diversity of his mental states, Cerberus is clearly one dog. He is a single biological organism having a canine nature. Rover, Bowser and Spike may be said to be canine, too, though they are not three dogs, but parts of the one dog Cerberus. If Hercules were attempting to enter Hades and Spike snarled at him or bit his leg, he might well report, "Cerberus snarled at me" or "Cerberus attacked me."

The church fathers rejected analogies like Cerberus, although such does seem to represent an image of the Trinity amongst creatures. Now if Rover, Bowser and Spike each have a rationality and self-consciousness, Cerberus is still a single being inspite of having multiple minds because all share the one physical body. However, suppose Cerberus was killed and his minds survived physical death. How would each still be one being? Such a question is relevant to the Trinitarian concept of God, for God does not possess a physical body. As Craig and Moreland question, "Since the divine persons are, prior to the Incarnation, three unembodied minds, in virtue of what are they one being rather than three individual beings?"

One response to this question hinges upon how one understands the soul. I'm going to quote Craig and Moreland again who provide a more concise answer than I could produce, and one which also briefly covers the relevant position of understanding the soul (something which I can also expand upon further personally if desired):

... souls are immaterial substances and ... it is plausible that animals have souls... Souls come in a spectrum of varying capacities and faculties. Higher animals such as chimpanzees and dolphins possess souls more richly endowed with powers than those of iguanas and turtles. What makes the human soul a person is that the human soul is equipped with rational faculties of intellect and volition that enable it to be a self-reflective agent capable of self-determination. Now God is very much like an unembodied soul; indeed, as a mental substance God just seems to be a soul. We naturally equate a rational soul with a person, since the human souls with which we are acquainted are persons. Suppose, then, that God is a soul which is endowed with three complete sets of rational cognitive faculties, each sufficient for personhood. Then God, though one soul, would not be one person but three, for God would have three centers of self-consciousness, intentionality and volition, as social trinitarians maintain. God would clearly not be three discrete souls because the cognitive faculties in question are all faculties belonging to just one soul, one immaterial substance. God would therefore be one being that supports three persons, just as our own individual beings each support one person. Such a model of Trinity monotheism seems to give a clear sense to the classical formula "three persons in one substance."

Kurieuo.

<hr>
Quotes taken from: J. P. Moreland and William Lane Craig, Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 591-594.

Kurieuo,
For centuries church has been teaching the Trinity wrong. They taught that the Holy Trinity is made of of three persons, and that these three persons created the world.

These saying by the Father below contradicts the trinity of three persons from eternity, before creation.

I am Jehovah, and besides Me there is no Savior (Isa.43:11).

Am not I Jehovah, and there is none besides Me, and there is no Savior besides Me. Look unto Me and be ye saved all the ends of the earth (Isa.45:21,22).

I am Jehovah thy God, and there is no Savior.
besides Me (Hos.13:4).

I Jehovah will give thee for a covenant to the people, for a light of the nations. I am Jehovah, that is My name, and My glory will I not give to another (Isa.42:6,8).

Where does the second person, the son of God fit in. Same Protestant chruches believe the Son is not God, because of these words. They don't understand that Jesus is the Father in the flesh, Therefore He is Divine and Holy.



Creation was by one God who became Man under the Jesus Christ. A trinity is the soul, body and spirit of a person. We all have a soul, body and spirit. In Jesus Christ, the Soul, Body and Spirit is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, as it is written by Paul, that in Jesus Christ lives the fullness of the God-Head. Jesus said, He that hath seen hath seen the Father. In John 1 it is written that all creation was made by Him, not because of Him, but by Him, meaning He was the only Creator, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

Our trinity, which is the soul, body and spirit,is human. In Jesus Christ, His Trinity, which is His Soul, Body and Spirit is Divine.

Harry

if you guys havent read JP Holding's items on the trinity, id recommend them. the article on the relationship between the Father and Son makes sense to me. the one on the Father and the Holy Spirit i havent really taken the time read through carefully.
http://www.tektonics.org/jesusclaims/tr ... fense.html
http://www.tektonics.org/qt/quietthird.html

Hi Harry,

I don't want to assume anything, but it would be good knowing what general set of beliefs you hold to (e.g., whether it be that of Jehovah Witnesses, or Oneness Pentecostals). It sounds like the latter, and so I do not wish to debate the Trinity within this thread. Rather it was my intention within this thread to help those within mainstream Christian orthodoxy to understand the relationship of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit to each other as one God in a logically coherent way.

I'm quite alright arguing for the Trinity if you wish to debate it, but please open up a separate thread for discussion.

Thanks,
Kurieuo.

One way to see the trinity is like this;....H2O.

WATER, ICE AND STEAM. Three different forms yet equivilent to H20.
LIQUID, SOLID AND VAPOR of any substance yet equivilent to that substance.

Can H2O exist as ice, water, and steam at once though? There is always a point where many analogies tend to break in their representation of God.

Kurieuo wrote:Can H2O exist as ice, water, and steam at once though? There is always a point where many analogies tend to break in their representation of God.

Indeed it can. You can get a Sealed Container and have Frozen Water in it. Put heat under it and it creates Water, and then Steam when the Water starts to boil. All three at the same time yet all the SAME BODY of H2O

bizzt wrote:
Indeed it can. You can get a Sealed Container and have Frozen Water in it. Put heat under it and it creates Water, and then Steam when the Water starts to boil. All three at the same time yet all the SAME BODY of H2O

Oh NO, never do that !!!!!
You could end up with a massive explosion if you try a thing like that... er, rather like the "Big Bang".

Judah wrote:

bizzt wrote:
Indeed it can. You can get a Sealed Container and have Frozen Water in it. Put heat under it and it creates Water, and then Steam when the Water starts to boil. All three at the same time yet all the SAME BODY of H2O

Oh NO, never do that !!!!!
You could end up with a massive explosion if you try a thing like that... er, rather like the "Big Bang".

Of course I won't do that LOL... I was giving an example of How Water can be all three at once

Yet, normally water isn't in all three states at the same time . And one broke down H2O to a singular level, I see it will always be the case it can't exist in three states at the same time.

Better analogies perhaps, at least for me, would be considering God as a multiplicity (i.e., 1 x 1 x 1 = 1). Or the triangle example... or that God is love (1 John 4:16) and love involves a lover, a beloved, and a spirit (or communication) of love between lover and loved.

Kurieuo.

Kurieuo wrote:Yet, normally water isn't in all three states at the same time . And one broke down H2O to a singular level, I see it will always be the case it can't exist in three states at the same time.

Better analogies perhaps, at least for me, would be considering God as a multiplicity (i.e., 1 x 1 x 1 = 1). Or the triangle example... or that God is love (1 John 4:16) and love involves a lover, a beloved, and a spirit (or communication) of love between lover and loved.

Kurieuo.

Nice one... Well if you take H2O at the Molecule Level of course ha ha.

Yours are better

While I believe in the Trinity, I feel the suppression of the Modalists in the Early Church has led to the doctrine being improperly defined.

While it is easy to envision God the Father, and Christ Jesus in human form, the Holy Spirit has never to my knowledge been depicted in such a manner. It is often described symbolically, as a dove, a spark or a flame, suggesting that it posesses a different nature from the other two members of the Godhead. This is one area I give credit to Christian Science for exploring. Science and Health stressesthat God is non-material.

Hey all. I find this area of theology interesting since their is little Biblical foundation for it, yet it is widely used throughout Christendom to try and describe the three common essences of God that we find in the bible. Namely Jehovah the I AM, The Word Jesus Christ, and The Holy Spirit of God that descended upon Jesus and stayed with him. So I guess it is a good working model, but to just throw a wrench in the works, How do you justify the trinity with this passage of the Bible. Revelation 4:5 - And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.

Trinity is illogical and irrational. Every explanation that I been hearing were rationalization instead of rational Biblical based answer. And all this explanation doesn't really answer the posted question. The charge of the Trinitatians is that there is one God in three persons. Each person is equal with each other. How can you fit three omnipresent God in one space? This is actually tritheism because you have to worship these three person and accord faith in them equally. Three equal God should be prayed to, worship, have faith on them etc. That means I can asked Jesus for anything in Jesus name isn't thats absurd? Its that what the Bible teaches?
Joh 10:33-36 clearly tells us the claim of Jesus upon his person. Jesus is "a god" (devine/Psa 82:6) not God. The translator made a mistake when he translated the said accusation by the Jews into God. We detected that mistake when Jesus answer them with a god explanation. It is unconcievable for Christ who can read mind (by the power of the Holy Spirit) to misheard the accussation and answer them incorrectly. Here the answer fits the charge proving that the translator was wrong. Theos can be translated as God or a god in English. Bible translation had been declared as not-innerrant by both Romans and Protestant community. The Chicago convention which was attended by 500 different Pastors, Miniters, teachers, Preachers of different denamination produced the book called Cathecism of Innerrancy which declares that the Bible translation was not innerrant. Meaning there were mistakes intentional and unintentional in the translation of the original. It is very obvious that the threat of being outcast, exiled, or worst burn at stake influenced translator in the past. They were also influenced by the Gnostic theology to came up with doctrine like the two nature of Christ. Zeus, Hercules, Apollos were known to be godmen in mythological history. Jesus two natured person was not original but patterned to those mythological gods. It was also known that many were forced to embrace Trinity by threats. Ever heard about the inquisition?
The Bible does not supprot Trinity. Mar 12:29 Jesus said that the Lord is one. If words have meaning what does one means? Is there any place for another? Joh 17:3 Again Jesus said "the ONLY true God" , what does that mean? Paul who had no reason to deny the godship of Jesus and holy spirit did so in 1Cor 8:6 "yet for us there is but ONE God the Father..."not the son nor holy spirit. Paul wrote this to remove the confusion brought about by the existence of so many gods true and false. This was equivalent of a declaration of once faith.
I could argue for more but lets leave that for next time. The beauty is that inspite of these mistakes the Bible is capable of depending its truth. Since the Bible is the book of ultimate truth any deviation from it will result in contradictions, inconsistency, incontinuity, absurdity, disharmony etc. These were the signs that the wrong were committed. But the problem with us Christians was that instead of heeding these signs we instead embraced it, diminishing the potency of the Bible to correct itself. The truth is that human are fallible creature and because of that the written word of God is our only source of ultimate truth. That is why inspite of these deviation the Bible is still is capable of projecting its truth by being senseful. Obviously Trinity was added to the Bible that was why all red flashing light are glowing to tell us that it is wrong and not supported by biblical truth. Remember this I don't care how intellectual a preachers is the Bible should alway have the last say. Examine and test everything that is being thrown to you by these so called intellectuals by way of scriptures and see if it stands> Thank you

1Jo 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

We are too pray to the Father in the name of Jesus in theSpirit.