Anyone for a Threesome? – More Trinity.

Or … how to make yourself look like a complete and utter  Nob in the face of overwhelming evidence that flatly refutes your very silly assertion that the Trinity is terribly real and not  simply Made-Up Theological Drivel and you must believe me as I am a very clever devout believer and maybe even a Pastor, Priest or Vicar … honestly!

One of the reasons I admire the Christadelphians is their refreshingly honest, no-nonsense way of reading the bible regarding the godness or in this case Godness of the character Jesus of Nazareth.

To them, it is quite simple – he wasn’t.

And that is all there is to it.They are still nuts, of course, but nuts in a refreshing, no nonsense way. I like that. God bless ’em!

And here are some jolly good reasons why  trinitarians are simply just being very silly.

No trinitarian doctrine is explicitly taught in the Old Testament. Sophisticated trinitarians grant this, holding that the doctrine was revealed by God only later, in New Testament times (c.50–c.100) and/or in the Patristic era (c. 100–800)

And also …

The New Testament contains no explicit trinitarian doctrine. 

Plus …

other Christians admit that their preferred doctrine of the Trinity not only (1) can’t be inferred from the Bible alone, but also (2) that there’s inadequate or no evidence for it there, and even (3) that what is taught in the Bible is incompatible with the doctrine.

So they infer from their own particular reading of the bible. Commonly known as Cherry-Picking.

Some Apologists try to use deductive arguments … however, these arguments

… suffer from a crucial ambiguity: What is meant by “fully divine”? Until this is made clear, it isn’t clear which of the trinitarian theories is being argued for.

Eventually they invariably resort to  … well, ad hoc theological gerrymandering.

This traditional case for the divinity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit may be best construed not as a collection of deductive arguments, but rather as an inference to the best explanation, an attempt to infer what best explains all the biblical texts considered together. In this genre, however, alternate explanations are rarely explored in any detail, much less shown to be inferior.

But inevitably the midden hit the windmill.

It was only in response to the controversy sparked by the Alexandrian presbyter Arius (ca. 256–336) that a critical mass of bishops rallied around what eventually became standard language about the Trinity. 

And then there was this guy.

Athanasius and others in the prevailing party argued that the salvation of humans requires the Son and Holy Spirit to be equally divine with the Father. This kind of argument depends on various controversial models of salvation, 

Which basically meant that …

Christ has to be fully divine, as only a fully divine being has infinite value.

Until eventually we have this …

Finally, it may simply be that trust in the mainstream tradition, or in various particular Christian traditions, currently runs high; many confess trinitarianism simply because their church officially does, or because it and/or the mainstream tradition tells them that the Bible teaches it.

Therefore …

It has fallen to Christian philosophers and philosophically aware theologians to sort out what precisely the doctrine amounts to, and to defend it against charges of inconsistency and unintelligibility.

And we all know how that’s worked so far!

As most Christians are simply ignorant or can’t be bothered anymore resulting in …

Distrust of councils and post-biblical religious authorities has largely evaporated, even among Protestants from historically *anti-clerical and non-creedal groups. Ecumenical movements, and anti-sectarian sentiments probably also play a role in deflecting attention from the issues, in that to many it seems perverse to attack one of the few doctrines on which all the main, dominant Christian groups are in agreement.

*Jesus Followers perhaps?

In other words, they …

(Fill in the blank space with the correct three letter word and if you get it wrong you could win an all-expenses paid holiday at the Vatican with a Trinitarian of our choice – wow! )

Here’s a song to inspire you while you try to work out the answer from a bunch of Australian hooligans even noisier than John Zande.

Ark

Advertisements

65 thoughts on “Anyone for a Threesome? – More Trinity.

  1. I’m quite quiet, although my dogs can be rather loud.

    The NT doesn’t support it. There are many, many occasions where Jesus says he’s not god

    Jesus said “No one is good – except God alone

    Jesus said “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only

    John 13:3 the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God, and went to God.

    John 7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me

    John 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak,

    John 8:26 I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him

    John 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me.

    So when Jesus says ”My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me” he’s referring to whom, precisely? Who “sent” him?

    Himself?

    The silliness overfloweth

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Exactly. And the only biblical lines the Trinitarians like to use are all so ambiguous, whereas the commonsense lines simply tell it as it is – ”I’m just me – Jesus- and that’s that.”

      Liked by 2 people

        1. Hello darkness, my old friend
          I’ve come to talk with you again
          Because a vision softly creeping
          Left its seeds while I was sleeping
          And the vision that was planted in my brain
          Still remains
          Within the sound of silence
          […]

          Liked by 4 people

        1. When I look back, I am embarrassed to admit, I lived for a long time uncritically. Religion that was taught to me to determine my life in the hereafter that I should have questioned was accepted as given.
          From where I sit now, I don’t know how people rationalize these beliefs.

          Liked by 3 people

          1. It is staggering to say the least. I was never really religious so encountering people like Mel, Wally, Unklee, Frank, James, Bruce,Colorstorm and SoM etc just leaves me completely dumbfounded. That mature adults could actually believe this stuff is beyond my grasp.
            And when you read that link Peter provided … well… phew… blows me away.
            I think I should go back to believing in Santa Claus, at least I might get a few more presents out of it.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Those fellows that you mention and more do equally leave me dumbfounded too. How can they continue to hold onto such BS.
              The link by Peter has inspired me to want to be a guru and have a following, maybe I will be kept for a few years in a revolving chair.

              Liked by 2 people

          2. Mak:

            why be embarrassed?

            Okay, an adult still believing in Easter bunnies and Tooth Fairies and Jesuses (Jesii?) does have grounds for embarrassment, but believing when young and uncritical because you trusted your elders is entirely understandable.

            It’s those @#%&! elders who should be embarrassed — but that ain’t ever gonna happen.

            Liked by 1 person

    2. Hey John. Not sure if you are keeping track of this conversation, but I thought you’d find it funny that ColorStorm has brought up hyenas again. lol

      Me: ‘Since there is no such thing as the spirit…………’

      CS: Hmmm. You may want to have a chat with a hyena, a rhino, or a whitetail deer. Oh wait, they neither have a spirit or speak English, oops, sorry, my bad.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. And, of course, the entire nonsense is to preserve monotheism, why is beyond me. The Jews were happily practicing polytheism well into their scriptures and only got yanked out of it by a concerted program of the priestly caste.

    Makes more sense than: gods are real, but there is only one.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. In the article from Peter:

      The guru’s spokesman Swami Vishalanand told the BBC: “He is not dead. Medical science does not understand things like yogic science. We will wait and watch. We are confident that he will come back.”

      Hahahaha! And I’m sure keeping the guru in a (deep?) freezer doesn’t kill him by hypothermia! But of course, that’s too much “medical science” as well! 😉

      Those disciples sound identical to some other religious faith-followers who believe the same about their holy leader. No surprise though, during Antiquity the Greeks and Romans had very similar beliefs/practices — in several respects exactly the same — for those revered and humanly turned into “Gods.”

      The cognitive neurology, or better yet, the immense POWER of the human imagination/brain of these followers is mind-blowing. There comes a quick point when they are diagnoseable from the DSM-5.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Much like Norman Geisler being instrumental in the dismissal from his job of Mike Licona for suggesting in his 2010 book that the Raising of the Dead Saints was not a real event and should be viewed as analogous.
        And Dear Norm went gunning for him.
        When I first read this story I almost pissed myself laughing.
        And Yet Licona believes the resurrection of Jesus of Nowhere is a real gen-you-wine historical event.
        Serves him right for getting the chop. Stupid evangelical Nob.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. @ColorStorm

    If you could offer some plausible, civil explanations/apologetics, perhaps non-Christians would take you a little more serious.

    But until that time and until the time when Christians can sufficiently answer legitimate criticisms and disproofs of your holy bibles, theologies, fragmented followers, actual/plausible contextual-independent histories, and try to understand basics of interdisciplinary science… Christians will always remain part of the now declining portion (only 30%) of the globe’s more educated free population. Even 30% is nowhere accurate because way too many — like yourself ColorStorm — raise hell about how many false Christians are out there. Thus, maybe the more accurate percentage of “true” Christians is actually 10% – 20% and falling?

    I’m sure you are going to respond to this with an immature, disrespectful, heckling reply which never helps your case, nor your faith’s/religion’s cause or numbers. This is why I and most of us happily stick with the rest of the intelligent world, the 90% – 70% who do not and cannot believe in your God and Christ even after 2,000+ years and “witnessing” and “testimonies” like yourself and others in your circles. Maybe(?) hopefully(?) your attitude and outlook on people different from you will change.

    (Professor asks himself, WHY do I even bother? Then again, why does ColorStorm even bother?)

    Like

  4. hi prof:

    You are concerned with plausible, civil, logical even?

    Maybe you missed the question to the host here which he conveniently avoided:

    which is water?

    ice
    steam (I’ll add vapor and clouds)
    water…………………

    If you pay close attention, the answer is the jewel of the Trinity, which you and others mock to your own peril. But man do I love the lessons of nature which point to the divine. )

    Now then, after you have digested this, you may then be prepared to handle the word ‘let US make man in our image……………..’ Gotta love scripture. Unless of course you think man is made in the image of a hyena, laugh all you want. 😉

    Like

    1. ColorStorm,

      I was speaking in general about all of your past personal opinions defending your faith-religion, not to your specific comment here. I was not interested in your response to Ark.

      However, regarding the Trinity and its Old Testament corroboration, there’s PLENTY for you or any Christian to explain how the Tanakh supports Paulian theology. In nearly 40-years I have never read or heard any plausible explanations of exactly how the Jewish Tanakh hints or speaks about a God-in-three-parts. Not even Yeshua/Jesus speaks directly of a 3-part God-head. Only Paul does. That said, you are more than welcome to give YOUR scriptural exegesis from the OT.

      Also, if you care to explain precisely how “Nature” points to the Divine, I’m happy to read those corroborations too. On that subject, I would like to also read your explanation of why so many human beings are BORN (i.e. don’t choose!) without standard distinctions of male or female (1 out of 100 births), and why 1 out of 1,666 births have no distinct XX or XY chromosome or even in some cases born with the XXXY chromosome. In the Dominican Republic (and other parts of the world) where girls-at-birth begin turning into boys between age 7 – 12 called “Guevedoces.” These are just four prenatal-embryonic conditions I’ve mentioned. There are plenty more like Autism or Down-Syndrome, etc. Certainly all these prenatal conditions point to the Divine’s perfection, yes? As you state, ‘let US make man (and women) in our image.’ Hahaha.

      If you are going to blame sin/Satan for the Creator’s embyronic-prenatal “mistakes” — I personally do not consider any prenatal conditions a mistake! — then you’ll also need to sufficiently backup your sin/Satan assertions starting with WHY these prenatal conditions would be bad, evil, negative, unwanted in your view or your God’s view!

      Good luck to you. 😉

      Liked by 2 people

    2. Let’s compare ice, water, and steam, all things measurable to the trinity. All things that have no evidence of existence so we can even make up even more form. Why not 5, or 7?! Don’t go too high because then you’ll just reinvent Hinduism.

      Also clouds are made of ice or water, and steam is water. Vapor is the gas. You really understand so little, it’s just hard to keep track of what you don’t understand.

      Also cloud droplets aren’t spherical. They’re flat.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. Here ya go gill:

        Water vapor, water vapour or aqueous vapor is the gaseous phase of water. It is one state of water within the hydrosphere. Water vapor can be produced from the evaporation or boiling of liquid water or from the sublimation of ice. Unlike other forms of water, water vapor is invisible.
        Water vapor – Wikipedia

        Water water everywhere, in so many forms, yet all water. lol

        God’s word: 10.
        Gill: 0.

        But tkx for playing. Would you like to try Sports for 200?

        Like

        1. Alright you should just stick with trying to get physics right first before starting with the math.

          You were I assume trying to make some bullshit analogy with the trinity and the three phases of water. You claimed steam was a phase of water different from liquid water and ice. But steam is liquid water. You can’t see water vapor visually. Water vapor is a molecular water. This is in the definition you provided even. Meaning your example was factually incorrect as you had redundantly listed the liquid phase twice.

          Again how the water in it’s different phases but is measurable, compares to a fictitious entity that has no evidence of its existence still is beyond me, but I am sure it all makes sense in your head. lol

          Liked by 4 people

                1. So in effect you’re like the weatherman Bill Murray played in Groundhog Day, but not good-looking enough to get on the TV, right?

                  😉

                  Like

                2. Basically a group of scientific peers, science professors at the 2-3 universities you graduated, and others like myself say you are an expert. I wonder, what is ColorStorm’s expertise? LOL

                  Like

                3. That is a viable theory Swarn. Mine would come more from the field of psychology and the DSM-5. 😉 One thing has become very clear: he has issues with anger, common respect and decency, as well as with patient ettiquette. LOL

                  Liked by 1 person

                4. “He’s like a talented actor who likes to live his role and does it for no pay.”

                  He’s like an actor who likes to live his role and does it for no pay.

                  Fixed.

                  Liked by 2 people

          1. Sez gill”

            ‘You can’t see……..water vapor visually’

            yet you boast your issue that ‘no man hath seen God………..’

            So you think you can erase Him from existence? Ha! You have made my point.

            Thanks, but God and His word are light years ahead of our petty gripes.

            Like

            1. Am I griping? Lol

              You’re being ridiculous. Sight is not the only way to detect existence. You can still measure the presence of water vapor, you can quantify it, you can predict it’s behavior. To compare it to a fictional entity is ridiculous. Take another tack. I’ve honestly been more convinced of the existence of God from honest and kind people. You are neither. You’re at best the ring master at a bad circus, trying to convince kids that a pony covered in a gray blanket is an elephant.

              I know it’s embarrassing that your little display of theatrics was torn down so easily by the fact that you didn’t seem to know that steam is not a gas, but now you’re just grabbing at straws. You can’t see the wind either (because, like vapor is made of invisible molecules) but it can knock you over. It turns windmills and pinwheels alike.

              As always chatting with you has been a gas. Your rhetoric and sidestepping seems to be causing having on the old digestion system. I it’s given me a bad case of the vapors.

              Like

              1. No gill, it is YOU who is conveniently missing the main ingredient of the properties of that which is essential to life: water.

                You can dance all you want, but all I see is two left feet watching you stumble at the obvious inferences that it is water, and the nature of water, as seen and clearly demonstrated and proven through its various properties, which embarrasses the moanings of the godless.

                Did I ever tell you about the great deep? Things revealed thousands of years ago through scripture which so-called modern science is still clueless.

                But I digress.

                Like

                1. You would think by now nan that embarrassment has found your limit…..but noooooo. lol

                  The ‘fountains’ and waters of the deep have long been in existence before the first atheist graced this earth.

                  yet, Yet, YET, it has only been in YOUR lifetime that the so called scientists have ‘found’ the springs of the great deep, a world in so called intellect is clueless, having less than .05 per cent of knowledge of what lies beneath the surface. Ha! Take that you whippersnapper. Gotta love God’s word.

                  And btw, the commenters here remind me of someone at a rare concert, who hear not a word because they are focusing on their partners pimple!!

                  Avoid the distractors nan. You know God’s word is good. Very good. But back on point. Gotta love water in all its forms. 😉

                  Like

                2. You act like digression wasn’t your intention. Digression is what you excel at to avoid defending anything you say. All you have are worthless analogies to things that are real to those that are fictional. I am sure at all seems impressive to those who believe in magic, but your hand waving only makes you appear as a snake oil salesman to me.

                  You are right, water is necessary for life. I’ve been thirsty for it which is a clear sign that it is necessary for me. However I’ve never been thirsty for that psychopathic human invention called Yahweh. It’s a warm day here. I think I’ll get a cold glass of water. I am sure it will taste divine. 🙂

                  Liked by 1 person

                3. Gill-
                  Try to sty focused. The post here WAS about the Trinity.

                  I used a natural analogy to present a spiritual concept. YOU admitted water vapor cannot be seen, yet by your own words is very real.

                  Sorry you cannot seen your lack of logic. You will run out of excuses before God loses a wink of sleep.

                  Like

                4. @CS

                  Surely you did not think that I am unaware that God neither slumbers nor sleeps……

                  Do you think this is because he is addicted to re-runs of Days of Our Lives and the A Team?
                  Or maybe he has a fetish for Joan Rivers selling jewelry on the shopping channel?
                  Or … the gods forbid, he adopted Bruce’s former (?) viewing habits?

                  Like

                5. Again you miss the point. Just because something can’t be seen doesn’t mean it can’t be measured, detected, or have it’s behavior predicted. Sight is not a criteria of existence. Try closing your eyes and walking around your house, you will discover very quickly that there are other ways to detect existence. However the trinity, or any part of the trinity has no ability to be measured or detected. No hair will curl, no condensation or deposition, no change in the evaporation rate or sublimation rate based on the humidity in the room. No ideal gas law will describe what happens to it when the temperature or volume changes.

                  Since there is no such thing as the spirit, spiritual concepts have no basis in reality. Again you tried to use a real thing to compare to a fictional thing. Of course you are free to do so from a philosophical point of view, but that in no way makes your spiritual concept real. Just like me saying that there are horses and one-horned creatures such as rhinoceroses therefore unicorns are real. See I used natural analogies towards a fictional concept. Guess what? The fictional concept is still a fiction.

                  Wait God has to sleep? lol That must suck for the Christians in the wrong time zone.

                  Like

                6. ‘Since there is no such thing as the spirit…………’

                  Hmmm. You may want to have a chat with a hyena, a rhino, or a whitetail deer. Oh wait, they neither have a spirit or speak English, oops, sorry, my bad.

                  And just for kicks, try explaining the color green to a blind man, or the scent of the lily of the valley. Can’t seen it eh. Must be a biatch for ya.

                  Like

                7. However, there is Balaam’s donkey, of course.
                  Now he talks and speaks English. S’right there in my trusty KJV!
                  And as the lady once said (sic) ”If English is good enough for Jesus, then it sure as Gehenna is good enough for me , yesiree.”
                  And if an English-speaking donkey isn’t enough, there is always the resident English- speaking Ass … with a capital ‘A’ currently masquerading as an English speaking lion.

                  Like

                8. As always your ability to throw objects up in the air as a distraction is impressive, but the problem with your act is that you are unable to catch the objects as they fall to keep the juggling demonstration going.

                  What does being able to talk to animals have anything to do with anything? It is astounding to me that you even think that this is even a counter argument. Is this what it’s like to talk to a Christian fundamentalist with ADHD? I do remember you have a particular fascination with hyenas. So I guess at some point is to be a part of your drivel.

                  Your final paragraph is again filled with more nonsense and obfuscation. Green is only a wavelength, interpreted by our brains to look the way it does. Given everybody’s genetic variation there is no way to determine whether the green I see is the exact same hue as someone else. That being said the wavelength is both detectable and predictable. The fact that someone who doesn’t have eyes can’t see it matters not. What they could do however is feel the change of leaves in autumn as the green chlorophyll dies due to the reduction of light. And the blind man could tell that daylight hours are being reduced by the decreased impact of the sun on their skin at solar noon as the solar angle is decreasing. And this can be felt by everybody if they close their eyes, because it’s detectable. Science is true for the blind and those with vision.

                  By the way, you are aware that you are incapable of actually answering a question or providing actual evidence for any point you make. It’s almost like a disability.

                  Colorstorm: God is obvious.
                  Person foolish enough to talk to you: Could you provide some evidence of this?
                  Colorstorm: There are trees, can you not see them?
                  PFETTTY (for brevity): What do trees have to do with proof for God?
                  Colorstorm: A peashooter cannot sink a submarine.
                  PFETTY: Okay, but could you offer some evidence for God?
                  Colorstorm: Hyenas.
                  PFETTTY: Are you insane?
                  Colorstorm: To not believe in God would be insane, vapor cannot be seen yet it exists.
                  PFETTTY: Okay then how else should we detect God?
                  Colorstorm: Try explaining green to a blind man.
                  PFETTTY: This makes no sense.
                  Colorstorm: If trusted in the wisdom of ancient knowledge you would.

                  Seriously what is wrong with you? LOL

                  Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s