Open Theism Stirs Controversy on College Campuses

[godrulz]

Originally posted by lighthouse

As e4e's signature says, 1x1x1=1.

Correct. Limited, but helpful illustration/analogy.

1+1+1=3 represents Mormonism/polytheism, not monotheism.

We have to distinguish nature/essence/substance from personal distinction/'person' (not identical to a finite human person, but having independent will, intellect, and emotions...Jesus prayed to the Father, He was not the Father. The Father is God/Jesus is the same one God).

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by godrulz

There are logical fallacies in play here. There are philosophical answers for this nonsense (you do the research...I read it, but cannot duplicate it off the top of my head). Quit playing word games like if a tree falls in the forest with no one around, does it make a sound? (Yes).

Which came first, the chicken or egg? (chicken)

Where did Cain get his wife? ('sister').

Did Adam have a belly button (maybe, maybe not).

There is nothing wrong with the reasoning, but the weakness lies in logic itself. It is imperfect. Throughout time great thinkers and mathematicians have tried and come up with nothing but weak resolutions to the many contradictions that exist in logic.
Show the specific weakness in the reasoning, or accept that logic is imperfect.
If it is "word play" as you say, then show how that is true.

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by godrulz

RE:As e4e's signature says, 1x1x1=1. :

Correct. Limited, but helpful illustration/analogy.

1+1+1=3 represents Mormonism/polytheism, not monotheism.

We have to distinguish nature/essence/substance from personal distinction/'person' (not identical to a finite human person, but having independent will, intellect, and emotions...Jesus prayed to the Father, He was not the Father. The Father is God/Jesus is the same one God).

This is indeed wordplay. If one says there is a Father, a Son, and a Holy Spirit in the Godhead one is showing necessarily a separation in the Godhead itself. There is no way around that point.
Even in the wordgame 1x1x1=1 the first 3 1's are implied to be distinct, hence separation in the Godhead iteslf.
Forget the polytheism argument:
1(Father)+1(Son)+1(Holy Spirit)=1(Godhead) according to trinitarism.

Whether you accept it or not, when you say "The triune nature of God is not a matter of logic" you are admitting God is beyond logic.

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by lighthouse

Concepts exist as nothing more than concepts. They are not real.

Lighthouse, the question was whether concepts exist; not whether concepts were "real" according to your terminology.

You have clearly stated again that concepts exist, though they are not "real". You belong in the "Deny" category on this principle.

 

[daniel]

Forget the polytheism argument:
1(Father)+1(Son)+1(Holy Spirit)=1(Godhead) according to trinitarism.

First let me say I'm not an open theist. Then let me say that your reasoning here is flawed.

The point you were trying to make was that the Father + the Son + the Holy Spirit does not equal 1 God in logic. However, the doctrine of the trinity as I understand it does not say that that all three equal 1 God, but, as you plainly wrote, 1 Godhead. This can easily be shown to be logically possible as godrulz gave common examples in which three parts was equal to one whole.

Do we humans completely understand the Godhead? Nope, but that does not mean that logic is faulty, it means that our understanding is faulty. Understanding and logic are not the same thing.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by STONE

In order to cover any distance at all, no matter how short, the person/object must already have completed an infinite number of distances.

that is false. all you are showing is that the finite distance one has covered can be broken up into infinitely smaller pieces.

Can an infinite number of distances be logically (not evidently) completed? No. Any distance can be divided infinitely, and those distances cannot be completed logically, as they are infinite in number. Therefore the person/object cannot even get started.

again, all you are showing is the finite distance can be broken up into infinite pieces.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by STONE

It is true that God is one and yet three; can't OV'ers even accept this though proving themselves contradicting logic?

I simply want you OV'ers to agree God is ultimately beyond logic.

the trinity does not contradict logic. it may not make sense at first, but that is quite different from being illogical.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by STONE

This is indeed wordplay. If one says there is a Father, a Son, and a Holy Spirit in the Godhead one is showing necessarily a separation in the Godhead itself. There is no way around that point.
Even in the wordgame 1x1x1=1 the first 3 1's are implied to be distinct, hence separation in the Godhead iteslf.
Forget the polytheism argument:
1(Father)+1(Son)+1(Holy Spirit)=1(Godhead) according to trinitarism.

Whether you accept it or not, when you say "The triune nature of God is not a matter of logic" you are admitting God is beyond logic.

Revelation > Reason/'logic'.

If one rightly distinguishes the one nature/essence of God from the personal distinctions, there is nothing illogical about this. Analogies are also limited, so do not press finite analogies beyone their limits to describe an infinite God.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by daniel

First let me say I'm not an open theist. Then let me say that your reasoning here is flawed.

The point you were trying to make was that the Father + the Son + the Holy Spirit does not equal 1 God in logic. However, the doctrine of the trinity as I understand it does not say that that all three equal 1 God, but, as you plainly wrote, 1 Godhead. This can easily be shown to be logically possible as godrulz gave common examples in which three parts was equal to one whole.

Do we humans completely understand the Godhead? Nope, but that does not mean that logic is faulty, it means that our understanding is faulty. Understanding and logic are not the same thing.

Part of the solution is to diffentiate compound unity (triune) from a solitary situation. There are different Hebrew words (yochid; echod...sorry for wrong spellings?). God is one in the sense of diversity within unity (cf. Body of Christ I Cor. 12).

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

the trinity does not contradict logic. it may not make sense at first, but that is quite different from being illogical.

It is beyond reason, but not unreasonable. We accept the revelation by faith, without understanding completely the infinite God with a finite mind. When we think of the uncreated triune Creator, we worship in awe, lest our brains short circuit trying to figure it all out.

 

[servent101]

Godrulz

It is beyond reason, but not unreasonable. We accept the revelation by faith, without understanding completely the infinite God with a finite mind. When we think of the uncreated triune Creator, we worship in awe, lest our brains short circuit tring to figure it all out.

I agree that there are aspects of an infinite God that we cannot completley understand with a finite mind - but the Trinity, it does not seem that complex to me - nor the existance of God - which you atribute to accepting as a revelation of "faith" - I do not know what you mean - please explain how you percieve this as "faith".

STONE

Originally posted by STONE

This is indeed wordplay. If one says there is a Father, a Son, and a Holy Spirit in the Godhead one is showing necessarily a separation in the Godhead itself. There is no way around that point.

God revealed Himself to the people in the "local region" as Father, Son and Spirit, the relation between the "three means of revalation" is known as the Trinity - there is no magic, or mystery to the word, it is just used to "cap" the observations of scholars who have studied the Word, to determin exactly how the Son, Father, and Spirit, are presented in the Closed Canon of Christian Scripture.

With Christ's Love

Servent101

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by daniel

First let me say I'm not an open theist. Then let me say that your reasoning here is flawed.

The point you were trying to make was that the Father + the Son + the Holy Spirit does not equal 1 God in logic. However, the doctrine of the trinity as I understand it does not say that that all three equal 1 God, but, as you plainly wrote, 1 Godhead. This can easily be shown to be logically possible as godrulz gave common examples in which three parts was equal to one whole.

Do we humans completely understand the Godhead? Nope, but that does not mean that logic is faulty, it means that our understanding is faulty. Understanding and logic are not the same thing.

True, my point is 1+1+1=1 is beyond logic, as is God.

Godrulz said:
E.g. Time= past, present, future...3 distinctions, but one time.
God is a compound unity, not a solitary being.
One cluster of grapes...all grapes by nature, but distinct, one army with many soldiers, one family with many members, etc.
Water= solid, liquid, gas...3 states that are different, yet all water as to nature/molecules.
Man= spirit, soul, body....distinct/tripartite, yet one man.

If you and Godrulz were correct in saying Jesus, or the Father were like a grape/soldier(person) from the cluster/army(God), that would imply that Jesus is not God logically, but a part of God; this is untrue and Heresy. However according to set theory (which underlies all mathematics and logic) a system/set cannot be a member of such system/set. That would cause a contradiction, yet we know it to be true.

That the immortal can be mortal is itself a contradiction in the nature of the Jesus.

Physics: Is light a wave or a particle? Science says both. (But a wave is not a particle, and a particle is not a wave. This is a contradiction).

Mathematics: n = n+1 where "n" is infinity (This is a contradiction.)

Language: You can help me by not helping me (This is a contradiction)

I agree with the Law of Non-Contradiction; however only within the realm of that which cannot be contradicted.

Re: Understanding and logic are not the same thing: Godrulz has stated similarly that some truths we understand the trinity by revelation and faith, not logic. I fully agree with you both. This is because reason and logic have their limitations, where as God does not.

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by godrulz

It is beyond reason, but not unreasonable. We accept the revelation by faith, without understanding completely the infinite God with a finite mind. When we think of the uncreated triune Creator, we worship in awe, lest our brains short circuit trying to figure it all out.

Exactly. God is beyond reason.
(beyond reason, but not unreasonable) is a contradiction.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by STONE

Exactly. God is beyond reason.
(beyond reason, but not unreasonable) is a contradiction.

Apparent contradiction? We know God because of His self-revelation, not reason. This revelation is not unreasonable since it is truth and reality.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by STONE

True, my point is 1+1+1=1 is beyond logic, as is God.

1+1+1=1 is not beyond logic.

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth
that is false. all you are showing is that the finite distance one has covered can be broken up into infinitely smaller pieces.
again, all you are showing is the finite distance can be broken up into infinite pieces.

Logic dictates a finite distance can be broken up into an infinite number of smaller pieces. Each of those pieces must be traversed logically.

How can an infinite number of pieces be traversed logically?

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

1+1+1=1 is not beyond logic.

All the 1's are equal and uniform in the above logical sentence. Therefore your conclusion is flawed.

If you are implying this because 3 parts equal one whole, you would be wrong also because one whole (set) is a distinct entity from it's parts (members).

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by STONE

Logic dictates a finite distance can be broken up into an infinite number of smaller pieces. Each of those pieces must be traversed logically.

How can an infinite number of pieces be traversed logically?

Keep researching. There is a philosophical flaw to the riddle and a cogent answer (I just cannot spout it off the top of my head).

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by STONE

All the 1's are equal and uniform in the above logical sentence. Therefore your conclusion is flawed.

If you are implying this because 3 parts equal one whole, you would be wrong also because one whole (set) is a distinct entity from it's parts (members).

1+1+1=3 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3=1 (not helpful)

1x1x1=1 (this is more helpful to our discussion, but limited)

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by STONE

Logic dictates a finite distance can be broken up into an infinite number of smaller pieces. Each of those pieces must be traversed logically.

How can an infinite number of pieces be traversed logically?

because it's still a finite distance.