Tags

, ,

The trinity is the core of the Christian doctrines and yet the most absurd. There have been a lot of attempts to logically explain it. From the egg and apple models to an even more complex and confusing use of the Phytagoras theorem. One thing common to all these is the futility in arguing the unnecessary. Unnecessary is the word. Or have you ever seen monotheists get into the dilemma of logically explaining the oneness of God? Some things are known from the most innate nature of man. A big one is the absolute oneness of God. One would be Christian apologetic had gone: it’s like a box, what you are looking at is all you see. It doesn’t mean the other sides do not exist. Meaning, the trinity is to me, what I see. It doesn’t mean the other parts do not exist. Well, firstly, if that is what I see, then I feel that is what I should be held accountable for. Justice demands that I be not overburdened with what I can’t bear. What I mean is that since I can’t comprehend the trinity, then God won’t ask me about it. Now back to the box. To get this right, one does not really have to think extra hard out of the ox. I see a side of a box that I visualize quite alright but does it remove the 4-sides property of the box? I have deliberately used the word property here and the reason will become clear as we go on.
Same, if you assume God to be 3 in 1, or third of One or One of third or whatever because that’s what is apparent to you. OR I assume Him to be absolutely One because that’s what is clear to me. Both arguments will never remove the PROPERTY of Oneness of God, just as it didn’t remove the 4 sidedness of the box. It is what you see, but it doesn’t make it correct. Innately and even intuitively, we are made to recognise some facts even without being taught. We knew a line and a circle even before we got into kindergarten. We even know there is a Supreme Being that presides over the affairs of the world before we were taught.
Then she comes back arguing; “no, it’s like someone who is a programmer, a family woman and also an engineer.” She can be the same person but doing three different things. Now, a simple yes or no question: When she dies, say for three days before the resurrection or is it resuscitation, will the other parts still be well and living? The programmer dies, not just with her programming skills but also with her caring for the family and her engineering skills.
Never to give up, another one fires back. I’m on the phone, I’m talking , I’m listening and at the same time I’m watching. Does that make me more than one? God, when will these people wake up from this slumber and drop these dogmas. Wait a minute, why stop on three? Why not consider that you can also be eating or touching. Then go on and prove that God is 5.But the main thing is that he has brought in an argument that leaves the premise and goes on searching for warrants. God is absolutely different from Christ and the holy spirit. They have distinct attributes. We are not talking about God sitting, talking or doing any other thing. We are talking about God in 3 distinct physical states. If you can argue that you can be man, dog and a cat at the same time, I will be more pleased.

Advertisements