God: Trinity or Unity?

[Soapy]

Existence of God, Angels, Satan, Adam and Eve, Flood, Immaculate conception, Resurrection, etc.

Unfortunately, the Christian / Judaistic / Muslim belief theology directs us to believe the general themes involved.

It is just the details or specifics that differ.

I can’t convince you of a ‘God’ entity except to ask you how you think the world came into bring and what drives the intelligence of its development - and the purpose for its existence. I find it hard to believe that the whole world is not governed by a higher form of intelligence - and especially welcome the fact that no global disasters have taken place during the time of mankind unlike prior to man’s existence (I know disasters have occurred during mankind’s time but you will find these were due to humans themselves)

Angels. Angels are SPIRIT HELPERS. Angels are immensely powerful and highly intelligent - but not self-willed - aids to the higher intelligence. Think of how humanity uses machines and robots and computers to help him in his quests. Many of these devices are highly ‘intelligent’ and immensely ‘powerful’ but they are not ‘self-willed’. Do you see that humanity reflects his creator - the scriptures says that it’s because humanity was made in the ‘image’ of its creator just as a compliant son imitates his Father.

Satan. In our belief, the highest Angel created by God overstepped his position in the creation of the world and of mankind and desires to also receive the worship that the creative intelligent God reserved for himself. Can you imagine the situation of the greater servant believing that his help was worthy of the same reward as that of the master! Thus, THE Satan (Satan is not a personal name - it means ‘[anyone] who opposes [Truth and Righteousness]’) set about trying to destroy the works he helped create due to jealousy (The Satan was endowed with an element of self-will due to his greater position as head Angel just as a head servant is allowed a certain amount of Liberty with the master of the household : humans imitating God!!?). I’m stopping here but there’s a whole heap more I could say.

Adam and Eve. I guess you heard people say that God created Adam and Eve equally. No he did not. God created Adam (full stop!). Adam was ANDROGYNOUS!! But God asked Adam to choose a companion (creature) to be a help-mate!! Remember what I said about God having Angels as help-mates —- remember what I said about mankind imitating his creator?
Adam saw none of the animals as an adequate help-mate. And so God took out of Adam certain TRAITS of his humanness and fashioned them into another human being - called ‘WO-MAN’ (which is Hebrew for “Taken out of Man”. Therefore, it would take BOTH a Man AND a WO-MAN coming together to become one whole person of humanity: hence we have MARRIAGE for the procreation of offspring. The FATHERING AND HUSBANDRY is in MAN and the INCUBATION AND NURTURING is in WO-MAN.
It is certainly true that male and female are EQUAL in need of each other but they are certainly not EQUAL in STATUS in the Godly sense otherwise we are in danger of recreating the situation that brought sin into the world of the servant desiring equal reward as the master: scriptures says that the WO-MAN was to be a help-mate to her Husband (P.S. This does not excuse ABUSE of a wo-man by a man. Also, the word, ‘EQUAL’ is misused these days and has partially lost its true meaning and hence the claim giving rise to something being equal to another thing despite both being quite different entities)

Flood: The flood was not ‘World-wide’ (global). The Bible defines the world-wide flood as global only because at the time of Moses (who wrote the first four books of the Torah) the ‘world’ was JUST THE KNOWN AREA OF HUMAN HABITATION. But aside from that I know no more!

Immaculate Conception: Just as Adam was created from a lifeless body state to a living body state by the infusing of the spirit of God into the body, so the egg of the virgin was infused by the spirit of God - and note that BOTH creations classed the child born thus as ‘SON OF GOD’.
Adam, in the day of his creation until he sinned, was ‘Son of God’.... Jesus was likewise ‘Son of God’ but remain so and therefore is eternal son of God. More, much more, on that if you like.

I’ll stop there because of the risk of writing too much.

 

[wellwisher]

A unity can also be a trinity. A simple math way to see this is to look at a cartesian coordinate system in 3-D. This coordinate system has three axis (x,y,z) and a single origin at (0,0,0). Plots on this axis system use the three axis to help show relative proportions of x,y z for the curve, relative to the origin. I would guess x=father, y=son, and z=holy spirit in the trinity coordinate system. We follow natural law; father, with love; son and truth; holy spirit and we achieved unity.

To learn to think in 3-D, one will first need to learn how to think in terms paradoxes, to help approximate 3-D thought; right brain. For example, one may say God is larger than large, but smaller than small. This paradox does not make sense in terms of 1-D language, since each extreme is different from the other in terms of language labels. It makes sense mathematically, in 3-D, since larger than large is positive x,y,z while smaller than small is negative x,y,z. They are very distinct places on the same 3-D axis, that are most separated, but average to the origin and are part of the entire 3-D affect that is God.

The unity and trinity would imply a type of plot that balances itself in 3-D, so it always adds up to (0,0,0). It would contain part father=x, part son=y, and part holy spirit=z, and can be reflected by its opposite some where else, to express 3-D. There is a time to sow and a time to reap; opposites that are part of the unity of God in 3-D. It is not about good and evil, which is 2-D. The tree of life is 3-D; trinity.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I can’t convince you of a ‘God’ entity except to ask you how you think the world came into bring and what drives the intelligence of its development - and the purpose for its existence. I find it hard to believe that the whole world is not governed by a higher form of intelligence - and especially welcome the fact that no global disasters have taken place during the time of mankind unlike prior to man’s existence (I know disasters have occurred during mankind’s time but you will find these were due to humans themselves).

Nice unscientific stories, good for children.
The world IMHO, started with expansion of space, which created energy and its counterpart gravity. There is no purpose of existence. Humans came only 200,000 years ago out of the total life of 4.5 billion years of earth and 13.8 billion years of the universe. We do not know how long humans will last, but then, all species go extinct in time. Sun gives us a maximum time of a billion years before it starts turning into a red dwarf and make earth so hot that it will be unable to support any life.

 

[Soapy]

Nice unscientific stories, good for children.
The world IMHO, started with expansion of space, which created energy and its counterpart gravity. There is no purpose of existence. Humans came only 200,000 years ago out of the total life of 4.78 billion years of earth and 13.78 billion years of the universe. We do not know how long humans will last, but then, all species go extinct in time. Sun gives us a maximum time of a billion years before it starts turning into a red dwarf and make earth so hot that it will be unable to support any life.

Hmmm.... A sad end to a fantastic intelligence and perfectly balanced system (Yeah, I know it’s unbalanced at present but this is because of the flaw in mankind : greed, avarice, pride, ignorance)

I have heard some people say that they refuse to have children because ‘What’s the point - we’re all going to be dead in 10 billion years time!’

The thing is, that’s the malaise that your belief system brings to humanity: no hope!

And thus, the ‘what’s the point...!’ would lead to ‘What the heck.... I might as well just do as I like now because any consequence isn’t going to matter.’

And yet, it is patently clear that ‘What the heck...’ is not how any organisation in any society exists - well, any organisation that holds to righteous laws!

So I would question you on why your belief system has laws and boundaries on behaviour if there is no purpose to the intelligence that we see among all living entities in our world.

In fact, what is the use or purpose to intelligence to living entities... HOW did intelligence arise and develop... the incredible EYE that interprets light to discern objects near and far; the fantastic EAR, SKIN, NASAL nerves ... that provide an all round set of senses that perfectly suit every aspect of the environment in which we live. Surely there must have been an overarching intelligence that to all this.

And if (since) there is, why would this overarching intelligence just allow this CREATION and DEVELOPMENT to just be annihilated?

 

[Soapy]

A unity can also be a trinity. A simple math way to see this is to look at a cartesian coordinate system in 3-D. This coordinate system has three axis (x,y,z) and a single origin at (0,0,0). Plots on this axis system use the three axis to help show relative proportions of x,y z for the curve, relative to the origin. I would guess x=father, y=son, and z=holy spirit in the trinity coordinate system. We follow natural law; father, with love; son and truth; holy spirit and we achieved unity.

To learn to think in 3-D, one will first need to learn how to think in terms paradoxes, to help approximate 3-D thought; right brain. For example, one may say God is larger than large, but smaller than small. This paradox does not make sense in terms of 1-D language, since each extreme is different from the other in terms of language labels. It makes sense mathematically, in 3-D, since larger than large is positive x,y,z while smaller than small is negative x,y,z. They are very distinct places on the same 3-D axis, that are most separated, but average to the origin and are part of the entire 3-D affect that is God.

The unity and trinity would imply a type of plot that balances itself in 3-D, so it always adds up to (0,0,0). It would contain part father=x, part son=y, and part holy spirit=z, and can be reflected by its opposite some where else, to express 3-D. There is a time to sow and a time to reap; opposites that are part of the unity of God in 3-D. It is not about good and evil, which is 2-D. The tree of life is 3-D; trinity.

What you are saying is a math overview of a fantastic system that could be true in every aspect. Excellent.

And certainly ‘GOD’ is in every aspect of everything that is in righteous matter.

But there is a monumental flaw in your theory: UNITY!!!

Your argument is concerning proving a unity in GOD.... (am I right?)

And that’s the problem.... the premise of your theory is FALSE from the start.

It is the same way many Trinitarians begin their false ideology by defining a FALSE PREMISE and building their ideology on the shifting sands of that false premise - and we all know what happens to structures built upon shifting sands!!!

Here’s the truth: GOD IS NOT A UNITY (full stop!)

I’ve written it before and will continue to write it again and again:
When God told his favoured nation that he was ‘One God’ Ha! What you and Trinitarians call, ‘a UNITY’ - ECHAD! (I can’t believe the terms ‘scholar’ and ‘learned’ and ‘intelligent interpreters of scriptures’ are used to anyone who believes that ‘Echad’ means ‘Unity’!!)

Trinitarians will not expand on their false ideology exactly because to do so would expose their fallacy. But I can do so for what is the truth. I’m sure your math skills covers ‘proof by infinite descent’.

• Trinity fails ‘proof by infinite descent’
• Unity fails ‘proof by infinite descent’

Simply... YAHWEH told his people that they were to believe that HE AND HE ALONE CREATED AND MAINTAIN ALL THINGS.

It’s IMPOSSIBLE to ascertain how ‘ALONE’ inflated into ‘A UNITY OF PERSONS’ and therefore there cannot be a DIFFERENTIATION.

Why did YHWH have to say that he alone created all things and that the Israelites should worship Him and only Him?

Well, the Israelites were living in and among and surrounded by tribes and nations who worshipped A MULTIPLICITY of ‘GODS’, ‘GOD’ was supposedly responsible for one or more aspect of all things in the created world. These ‘pagan’ nations made figurines of what they believed their favoured ‘God’ looked like and knelt before and provided prayerful and sacrificial worship to these ‘images’. The Israelites were told that they should refrain from such beliefs and not to participate in such ‘worship’ to these pagan ‘Gods’... that they should present their prayerful and sacrificial worship to ONE GOD, and ONE GOD ONLY: YHWH.

Read carefully and see that there is absolutely no INTEGRATION of multiple persons on that ONE GOD. There is no UNITY in an absolute ECHAD. And if there is no integration there can be no differentiation.

Just to be sure, Can you show me where you initially see a ‘UNITY’ of the Christian / Jewish GOD in the scriptures.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The thing is, that’s the malaise that your belief system brings to humanity: no hope!
And thus, the ‘what’s the point...!’ would lead to ‘What the heck.... I might as well just do as I like now because any consequence isn’t going to matter.’
And yet, it is patently clear that ‘What the heck...’ is not how any organisation in any society exists - well, any organisation that holds to righteous laws!
.. that provide an all round set of senses that perfectly suit every aspect of the environment in which we live.
And if (since) there is, why would this overarching intelligence just allow this CREATION and DEVELOPMENT to just be annihilated?

Denial or false hope is a useless thing. Let us face the facts. And what ever is going to happen is not going to happen today or tomorrow. We probably have millions of years to enjoy on earth (not factoring in a meteor hit or a Krakatova eruption).
Do whatever you want to do, nothing stops you accept the law of your land. Just do not go against it.
Righteous and not righteous are just conventions of a society. They differ from one to another.
It did not happen because a God clapped his hands. It took evolution some 4 billion years to develop that.
That is your belief, the fact is that there is no 'overarching intelligence'.

 

[Soapy]

Denial or false hope is a useless thing. Let us face the facts. And what ever is going to happen is not going to happen today or tomorrow. We probably have millions of years to enjoy on earth (not factoring in a meteor hit or a Krakatova eruption).
Do whatever you want to do, nothing stops you accept the law of your land. Just do not go against it.
Righteous and not righteous are just conventions of a society. They differ from one to another.
It did not happen because a God clapped his hands. It took evolution some 4 billion years to develop that.
That is your belief, the fact is that there is no 'overarching intelligence'.

Well, like I said, in any two belief systems the discussions are always going to end with, ‘Well, I believe this and you believe that!’.

I did say that I’m not going to convince you of belief in the truth so I can only put my point of view - set out my belief to you. And you are, as you’ve done, quite entitled to disagree and show your point of view.

Ok, but I can’t see how ‘Intelligence’ developed out of nothing! Something has to drive the point and purpose of it.

Take the development of the EYE. At first an entity creature had only a basic single light receptor which it INTELLIGENTLY used to detect a changing light source - no indication of what the cause was... It ‘knew’ to hide if a light changed to dark because there could be a predator wanting to eat (or harm) it.

BUT how did it know that? If another of its species had been predated how did this creature LEARN that there was danger about?

And how did the predator know that this particular creature was worthy of predation - that eating it would benefit the predator itself? I mean, if the creature didn’t move it might as well be a stone or rock! Oh, SENSES... ok!!

But senses require intelligence to discern the stimuli received?

And the creature LEARNED that it had to develop MORE light sensors to better discern what the changing light source meant... it could just have been a innocent leaf or other inanimate material blocking temporarily the light source - harmless. Why send its life hiding from an innocent supposed-harmful material!!

So it intelligently developed more and more receptors until a system of considerable resolution allowed it to discern harmful from innocent.

Do we not do a similar thing! What was the resolution of the first tv or computer visual devices.... and colour... ‘What’s the colour of that snooker ball on the left....!’

Yes, progressive development lead by INCREASING INTELLIGENCE.

As our Math guy points out: increasing circles... increasing dimensions. But from an initial single point.... BUT what is the intelligence - from WHERE is the intelligence - that drives the increasing progression?

 

[Aupmanyav]

That is intelligence, a 100 billion neurons receiving, processing information and doing what is necessary in a particular situation, a handiwork of some 700 million years since brain developed, first in fish. Read some biology book.

fMRI (Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging)

BTW, there is no God or Allah. Unity, trinity and multiplicity, all are equally fictitious.

 

[Soapy]

That is intelligence, a 100 billion neurons receiving, processing information and doing what is necessary in a particular situation, a handiwork of some 700 million years since brain developed, first in fish. Read some biology book.

fMRI (Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging)

BTW, there is no God or Allah. Unity, trinity and multiplicity, all are equally fictitious.

Can I ask why you are on a religious forum claiming there is no religion that you believe in (except the religion of non-belief: Atheism or Agnosticism)

I mean, if you were arguing a different God then at least there would be some point but saying that there is no God (as indeed the Christian scriptures assures us that some will say) does not provide a platform for credible dialogue.

I don’t mind responding to you because I love speaking of the true God and take the opportunity to anyone willing to listen or simply engage. But more so with Trinitarians who express a false God even while reading the same book as myself.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Can I ask why you are on a religious forum claiming there is no religion that you believe in (except the religion of non-belief: Atheism or Agnosticism).

FYI, I am an orthodox Hindu believing in 'Advaita' (non-duality). 'Advaita' belief is that all things in the universe are constituted by one entity, which we know as Brahman. Brahman is the substrate of all things and it is not God. We go by the saying of the first Sankaracharya (8th Century) which said (he was not the first to propound that view):

"Brahma satyam, jagan-mithya; jeevo Brahmaiva na parah"
(Brahman is truth, the perceived is an illusion; living beings and Brahman are not different)

 

[Soapy]

FYI, I am an orthodox Hindu believing in 'Advaita' (non-duality). 'Advaita' belief is that all things in the universe are constituted by one entity, which we know as Brahman. Brahman is the substrate of all things and it is not God. We go by the saying of the first Sankaracharya (8th Century) which said (he was not the first to propound that view):

"Brahma satyam, jagan-mithya; jeevo Brahmaiva na parah"
(Brahman is truth, the perceived is an illusion; living beings and Brahman are not different)

Well that is all wonderful and vague.

We have no argument with Hindu belief.

I’m not sure what you expect a Christian believer to do or say about your belief.

Im still asking why you think this thread in this forum is appropriate for your belief input.

My only view is that your belief system expresses that that your head ‘person’ is one. I’m not sure why it would be necessary to state a ‘oneness’ in a ‘person’ when there was no call for a dispute on the matter.

The thread here is from a Christian standpoint wherein false Christian believers purvey a belief that THEIR head ‘person’ (GOD: YHWH) is somehow a UNITY of THREE persons and that the Hebrew word used in reference to this God, “ECHAD”, is meant to mean a UNITY and not just the simple meaning of ‘ONE’.

My take on it is that the false Christians are ‘desperately’ trying to misuse words and meaning of words to further their campaign of a multiplicity of persons in a single God.

The reality is that the Jewish people (Hebrews / Israelites) were among and surrounded by tribes and nations who believed that the world was created and sustained by a multiplicity of ‘God persons’ whom they worshipped individually as being overseers of different aspects of the world.

As such, the true God told his favoured nation that they should worship Him and Him alone as their ECHAD GOD, their ONE AND ONLY TRUE GOD.

You must be able to see that there is no room for a multiplicity in the word ‘Echad’ used here. The true God said he was to be their ONLY GOD... that His nation was not to believe in multiple Gods as the PAGAN nations do.

So, this is the point and purpose of the thread:

• ‘Is [the Christian] God one, or a unity’

 

[Aupmanyav]

- - Well that is all wonderful and vague.
- I’m not sure what you expect a Christian believer to do or say about your belief.
- I'm still asking why you think this thread in this forum is appropriate for your belief input.
- My only view is that your belief system expresses that that your head ‘person’ is one. I’m not sure why it would be necessary to state a ‘oneness’ in a ‘person’ when there was no call for a dispute on the matter.
- So, this is the point and purpose of the thread: Is [the Christian] God one, or a unity’

- There is nothing vague about what Sankaracharya said. He was very precise in his belief. - Today science agrees that everything in the universe is constituted by (physical) energy which arose at the time of a possible beginning of universe. That it was so is postulated by mainly scientists who were born Christian.
- The debate is about existence of God before we can discuss whether he is one or three or many.
- I would again remind you that Brahman is neither a person nor a God. You are not getting it correct but I do not fault you for it. People from Abrahamic religions start with the presumption of one God. There is no head person in Advaita.
- As I mentioned earlier, the OP did not specify that it is a question only for Christians.

 

[Soapy]

- There is nothing vague about what Sankaracharya said. He was very precise in his belief. - Today science agrees that everything in the universe is constituted by (physical) energy which arose at the time of a possible beginning of universe. That it was so is postulated by mainly scientists who were born Christian.
- The debate is about existence of God before we can discuss whether he is one or three or many.
- I would again remind you that Brahman is neither a person nor a God. You are not getting it correct but I do not fault you for it. People from Abrahamic religions start with the presumption of one God. There is no head person in Advaita.
- As I mentioned earlier, the OP did not specify that it is a question only for Christians.

Well, I agree with one thing: the physical world we exist in is certainly ENERGY.

I wholeheartedly agree with that and expressed it often to those who listen to anything I do say.

But that aspect is not part of the SPIRITUAL element of the discussion.

AND, didn’t you say you didn’t believe in GOD!

 

[Aupmanyav]

But that aspect is not part of the SPIRITUAL element of the discussion.
AND, didn’t you say you didn’t believe in GOD!

Yeah, I don't. What is 'spiritual'? There is no spirit except in a liquor bottle. (smiles mildly)

 

[Soapy]

Yeah, I don't. What is 'spiritual'? There is no spirit except in a liquor bottle. (smiles mildly)

So then, is God a trinity or a unity.

The fact that the thread title asks about a trinity leads to the conclusion that the topic is about the Christian God in which there is dispute as to whether ‘He’ is a Trinity or a Unity.

Actually, the premise of the title is biased as it forces GOD into a polytheistic or a Union of multiples belief. The question setter thought he would be very clever by this deceptive methodology.

Again, I’m happy you said your god that you don’t believe in is ONE God.

This leaves no room for either a trinity or a unity. Excellent!

 

[Aupmanyav]

Well, theist Hindus also have their trinity: Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva.

Again, I’m happy you said your god that you don’t believe in is ONE God.

I do not have any God. I am a strong atheist. I do not even believe in the possibility of there being any God or Goddess.

 

[101G]

As said, God is neither a unity, nor a Trinity in Persons. but an "ECHAD" in ordinal dispensations, as (the First, and the Last).

let the bible speak.

Genesis 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."

Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

question, how did God go from a "US", and "OUR", to "His", and "He?"

God said, "Let US make man", STOP, who is the "US" that made man? but before you answer, listen to the Lord Jesus himself, and what he said as to who made man, Matthew 19:4 "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,"

now, can the Lord Jesus lie? no, so who was it that made man male and female at Genesis 1:26? ... name please, not just the generic "God", but name. remember Jesus said "he", God made man and remember it was the Word Jesus who made all things, (including man), John 1:3, and Isaiah 44:24.

anyone can answer.

PICJAG,
101G.

 

[cataway]

As said, God is neither a unity, nor a Trinity in Persons. but an "ECHAD" in ordinal dispensations, as (the First, and the Last).

let the bible speak.

Genesis 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."

Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

question, how did God go from a "US", and "OUR", to "His", and "He?"

God said, "Let US make man", STOP, who is the "US" that made man? but before you answer, listen to the Lord Jesus himself, and what he said as to who made man, Matthew 19:4 "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,"

now, can the Lord Jesus lie? no, so who was it that made man male and female at Genesis 1:26? ... name please, not just the generic "God", but name. remember Jesus said "he", God made man and remember it was the Word Jesus who made all things, (including man), John 1:3, and Isaiah 44:24.

anyone can answer.

PICJAG,
101G.

Yachid

 

[Soapy]

Well, theist Hindus also have their trinity: Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva.

I do not have any God. I am a strong atheist. I do not even believe in the possibility of there being any God or Goddess.

So I ask again: why are you posting in this thread?

I think (I know) you are misunderstanding the thread topic.

The three ‘Gods’ you illustrate are not a ‘TRINITY’ nor a ‘UNITY’.

I think you ate stressing the point of the thread topic.

The thread topic is asking if A GOD... or THE GOD... of the CHRISTIAN BELIEF is a SINGLE UNIFIED ENTITY or a MULTIPLE PERSON AS ONE entity.

In neither scenario is there any sense.

The only possibility is to say that (in Christianity) the three persons of the trinity are a CORPORATION... a BUSINESS ... with three CHIEF EXECUTIVES.

But that is a nonsense - and there is absolutely no imitation of any such system in humanity... and take it that humanity is madd in the image of this supposed God!!

 

[Aupmanyav]

I am discussing unity or trinity of God and the possibility that there might even be none. I again say that OP said nothing about Christianity.