Texture My Words
Myth #14 Logic and Reason can Create a Triune God that exists
Rather, their God is not at all.
Thomisticguy, the self ascribed spokesman for true Christianity on Blogstream and a closet Catholic, verbalizes a a form of omnipotence for God that is just all wrong. For the classical theist, his God can do anything that is (1) logically possible, and (2) consistent with being a personal, incorporeal, omniscient, omomnipresent, immutable, wholly perfect, and necessary Creator.
There is some degree of disagreement with the LDS position here, but it is a fairly accurate expression of LDS doctrine. Alma 7:8 in the Book of Mormon states "The Lord God has the power to do all things which are according to his word.
Thus, for Thomisticguy and other classical theists, God cannot do or create what is logically impossible. The Bible never really makes this broad a statement. However, Numbers 23:19 teaches that He "cannot lie." that such an act would be impossible for Him. So, there are some things He cannot do. This is not because He lacks the power to do them. It is because they are inconsistent with His nature and position as God. We see this point clearly with Augustine in his City of God which needs no discussion here.
Jesus first tells us how difficult it is for a rich man to become Christian... it would be easier that he pass through the eye of a sewing needle. This would be an impossible task but perhaps not a logically impossible task. Then Jesus reveals in the next verse: "With men this is impossible, but if they will forsake all things for my sake, with God whatsoever things I speak are possible." The implication is that God can do all that He says he will do. In like manner, we have an angel who came to Mary before the conception of Christ. Mary questioned the possibility of remaining a virgin conceiving the Son of God. (Luke 1:34). The angel assures her and in verse 37 states
"For nothing will be impossible with God."
If so, if there is nothing impossible to God - yet the logically impossible is something Thomisticguy believes He cannot do, then the logically impossible is not truly a thing. While the LDS can agree with this statement, Thomisticguy cannot because the three separate persons they say is numerically one individual is INDEED a logical impossibility. Does this mean that the Trinity is not truly a thing, (being logically impossible)?
Where Aquinas and Thomisticguy created this scenerio, they have worked themselves into another corner. Because IF the triune God is a logical impossibility and is as a consequence not a thing, it cannot exist.
The fact of the matter is God cannot be a logic impossibility where He, rather they together, exist.
This argument is not presented either facetiously or disrespectfully. Thom and those before him simply need to apply the same good LOGIC and REASONING to their position on the triune nature of God as they do to other aspects of their beliefs. If they would do so, the fallacies of their theology would be stripped away.
• First, on the contrary, I do agree that if a thing is logically impossible it is not truly a thing. Examples of this are a square circle and dry liquid. A circle is by necessity round and the second you make it into a square it ceases to be a circle and it becomes a square. Finally, I am glad you did a little research on this within your LDS realm and found out that I was right, that a logically impossibility is a non-thing. Wheew, I thought you would never see the obvious on this one.
• I have no problem agreeing with the fact that logical impossibilities are non-things because the Trinity does not fit the category of a logical impossibility. You, again, are mixing up your categories. The Trinity is one God (one divine essence) in three persons. An essence and a person are two separate categories. Pleeeease, Stealth, don’t think that Aquinas was as ignorant of these elementary things as you are. Why don’t you do a little homework and read up on essence and person. Do yourself a favor and avoid looking so misinformed.
The Greek concept, dated as it was, was turned upside down in 1905.
Tell me the name of the fellow who turned it upside down and in so doing made your triune God impossible?
In nature, in our existance, we have triple essences in one individul everywhere, don't we. Just so we can have a possible frame of reference to go on, and not an impossible one, please identify a powerful one, OK?
Perhaps I rambled too much for you. You have stated unequivocally that triple essences in one individul is a logical possibility. Please demonstrate in all of creation, such a possibility.
A claim's truth depends upon supporting evidence to the claim. I hope you have something. I'm about to provide strong evidence that your claim is a logical impossibility. That is, that your claim in false.
We are so close after so long. Let's go Thom.
well, I for one am waiting in baited anticipation for this indisputable proof from 100 year ago that still hasn't shaken the orthodox Trinity believing Christian world to the ground.
Once you have shown this indisputable proof ... well I'll go ahead an toss in my 2 cents.
Since it's 1905, I'm going to say "Who is Albert Einstein?" (1905 was Einstein's "miracle year" when he published on General Relativity, Brownian motion, special relativity and electomagnetism.)
However, since Einstein was dealing with the created world, whatever Einstein might have written should not define any limitations on the Creator.
Nevertheless, here we all are. And I revel in the light. This is great.
Now Puri, I did not frame my argument to suppose I could deliver an indisputable knockout punch that has somehow gone unnoticed for a century.
But I am sure for at least you, it has gone unnoticed. Oops, there is a beautiful naked woman in my hot tub beckoning me. I'll be back a bit later.
I am also going to point out that Jesus returned to many people so they could witness the holes in his hands and feet and thrust their hands into his side.
I would also say that in Genesis we are made is the image of God. We do not create God in our image, He created us in His. That means that His image must be one of flesh and bone only exhalted.
If you look at any religion there are portions of Christianity in all of them including the true worship of Satan. As Legion recognized the power and authority of Christ and spoke with Him and asked to not be just cast out.
Why were they cast in to the pigs and that was preferable for them than being cast out to where ever Christ cast other demons, he showed compassion even then for His fellow cast down, never to have a body beings that rebelled against His Father and did as they asked.
Now I believe that if people read Job more often they would understand that the Lord spoke with Satan and allowed Job to be tested. At that point in time the Lord did not have a body of flesh and bone, but he came and received one.
I must also say that the literal finger of God wrote on the tablets of stone to give to Moses the laws for the children of Isreal.
If Christ and God are one then why did Christ say Father into thy hands I commend my soul? First God the Father would have to have hands, second how could Christ say such a thing.
If He were all three people would he not say something along the lines unto myself I return to my home, or something similar?
Yet it was His Father, who had to with draw His Spirit from Christ in Gethesemane. It was His Father who tutored Him for His mission.
It was the Holy Ghost that testified to John the Baptist in the womb that Mary was pregnant with the Savior of man kind, not with the Triune god.
Again and again example after example, Abraham and Issac, the list goes on in the Old Testament that everything was set to bring about the life of the Redeemer of Isreal and the world and that He would be unblemished and perfect and the Son of God.
The Jewish people are still waiting for the deliverer the Son of God, as they rejected Christ mistakenly taking Moses as the deliverer and wanting their promised land. Yet so many of them knew the truth and recognized who the Savior was, the literal son of God.
I am a mother, sister, daughter and wife. I am one person, yet I am not my mother, sisters, daughter or my husband. My husband are united to gether is a common goal and that is to bring about the immortality of our family; I am also united with my mother and sister with that goal this does not make us one being, it makes us one in goal, in heart and in the process in which it should be done.
God the Father, Jesus Christ the Eternal Father and the Holy Spirit are three beings united with one goal and that is to bring about the immortality of mankind and to have as many of us return to live in the presence of Elohim, God the Father, our Heavenly Father.
Beth.
●Okay, let’s see if I can help you out here with some basic theology:
1) First, neither I nor Aquinas created this “scenario”—it is, as we will see, a figment of your imagination.
2) Neither I nor Aquinas created or developed the orthodox position on the Trinity. It precedes Aquinas by at least 1,000 years.
3) You keep mixing up ontological categories. The “one individual” you are referring to in the Trinity is the one divine essence. The three are the three persons within the one essence. This means that there is one intellect, one will and one consciousness within the Trinity. These are two separate categories of type.
4) If we were to say that there are three essences in the one God, then that would be a logical impossibility. There can only be one essence of anything (i.e. the human essence is to be a rational animal, but a dog essence is to be a sensitive animal of the “doggy” type. Therefore there cannot be a dog-man. That would be like being a square circle. In other words, by its nature (essence), a circle is round and a square has four equal sides).
5) The “persons” in the Trinity are the real relations of the divine processions. The word “person” as used in Christian Trinitarian theology is not the same as the modern word “personality.” The modern word personality connotes an individual will, intellect and consciousness that is unique. This is not what is meant by the ancient theological concept of divine “person.” Again, there can be only one essence of a thing. The essence is the “thing-ness” of something or the “what-ness” of something. The essence is what it is.
6) A comparable analogy to the Trinity is found in the human thinking process. The human is one essence (a rational animal). Because we are rational we have a mind (comparable to the Father) which thinks in words (comparable to the eternal Word, the Son); and expresses those words in spoken language (comparable to the Holy Spirit). One major difference between humans and God is that all things in God must be eternal and simultaneous; therefore, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are co-eternal and simultaneously part of the essence called God. Because all things proceed (not in time—since there is no time in God--but by logical order) from the Father, it is proper to refer to the Father as God even though all together are God.
Consequently the figment of your imagination is that the Trinity is a logical impossibility. However, you are mixing up categories of being. On the other hand, the LDS truly does believe in a godhead that has three divine essences. Now, this conception of God is logically impossible. Here are some reasons why:
1) There can be only one infinite being (essence). If the LDS godhead has three divine essences then only one can be infinite and the other two are not.
2) In order to be infinite, a being must be uncreated. Since there can only be one infinite being this would mean that two of the LDS godhead are actually created beings and not truly the Creator. Therefore, they would not truly be God.
3) The reality is that the LDS do not believe that the godhead has one divine essence; consequently, despite all of their protestations, they are polytheistic—they worship more than one god.
4) There cannot be more than one essence in a single being. The LDS recognize this by configuring their godhead as having three divine essences. In doing this, they deny the Trinity. They, therefore, cannot insist that they are monotheistic. You cannot be monotheistic and believe in a godhead that has three divine essences. Again, the LDS are polytheistic. The logical impossibility is for the LDS to insist that they are monotheistic and also believe that the godhead has three essences. This is equivalent to insisting that there can be a square circle.
5) The LDS cannot be Christian and hold to their polytheistic view of the godhead. It is a logical impossibility for LDS theology to be Christian.