Why is the concept of the trinity so poorly understood (or often straw manned)?

[1137]

The argument of Christianity being pagan based on having the 3 deities that are the Trinity is just ridiculous. 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1 isn't that hard to understand, especially when you understand the solar aspects of the symbolism. My question is are these people just anti-religious fundies practicing willful ignorance, is it a straw man, or is there something legitimately hard to understand?

 

[Ultimatum]

" 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1"

What is this "1"?

 

[Glaurung]

My question is are these people just anti-religious fundies practicing willful ignorance, is it a straw man, or is there something legitimately hard to understand?

There's usually some ideological agenda they're pushing.

 

[1137]

" 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1"

What is this "1"?

It's the Christian god...

Maybe my question is answered.

 

[JayJayDee]

There's usually some ideological agenda they're pushing.

Yes....it's called Biblical truth, as opposed to adopted falsehood.

Please show us in the Bible where God is broken up into "thirds".

 

[Revasser]

Mostly struck me as a deliberately vague bit of woo to make things seem mysterious and interesting.

Probably helped keep all the peasants who couldn't make sense of it in awe of the priests who seemed to understand and have some special knowledge. The fact that it became a central tenet of the religion probably helped keep all the straightforward people at the bottom from asking too many awkward questions too.

I prefer the Mormon take on the trinity. It's less silly.

 

[Glaurung]

Yes....it's called Biblical truth, as opposed to adopted falsehood.

The 'biblical truth' as interpreted by a 19th century heretical sect.

The true Church of Christ can never fall into heresy, this is a promise of Christ himself. You are outside of that Church.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

The argument of Christianity being pagan based on having the 3 deities that are the Trinity is just ridiculous. 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1 isn't that hard to understand, especially when you understand the solar aspects of the symbolism. My question is are these people just anti-religious fundies practicing willful ignorance, is it a straw man, or is there something legitimately hard to understand?

Well, it's so poorly understood that you slightly misrepresented it yourself when you wrote "1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1".

God is not made up of parts or components, and each Person of the Trinity is not some fraction of a greater whole. The Father is fully God, the Son is fully God, the Holy Spirit is fully God. This is where I'll say it is indeed legitimately hard to understand. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one God, they all share the same substance, but each Person is fully God, each is not a part of a whole.

 

[1137]

Well, it's so poorly understood that you slightly misrepresented it yourself when you wrote "1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1".

God is not made up of parts or components, and each Person of the Trinity is not some fraction of a greater whole. The Father is fully God, the Son is fully God, the Holy Spirit is fully God. This is where I'll say it is indeed legitimately hard to understand. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one God, they all share the same substance, but each Person is fully God, each is not a part of a whole.

Haha, I understand. I was referencing the whole " how does 1+1+1=1" critique of the Trinity.

 

[Ultimatum]

God is not made up of parts or components, and each Person of the Trinity is not some fraction of a greater whole. The Father is fully God, the Son is fully God, the Holy Spirit is fully God.

I'm sorry, but the Bible says otherwise.

God =/= Holy Spirit as evidenced by Genesis 1:26:
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:

God =/= Jesus as evidence by verses in John 13:
1 Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father...
3 Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God;

Even greater evidence is found in Matthew 19:16-17:
16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

I am afraid that your arguments break down in the face of these verses.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

I'm sorry, but the Bible says otherwise.

God =/= Holy Spirit as evidenced by Genesis 1:26:
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:

How does this verse show God is not the Holy Spirit?

God =/= Jesus as evidence by verses in John 13:
1 Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father...
3 Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God;

The Son and the Father are distinct, this is true. This only poses a problem for the modalist viewpoint that would say the Father and the Son are just different forms or modes of God. The Trinitarian view is that the Father and Son are distinct Persons, and the Father is the source of the Trinity, begetting the Son and spirating the Holy Spirit. Therefore the Son did come from the Father, and does return to the Father, being the source of the Trinity.

Jesus says in John 8:58 that "before Abraham was, I AM", invoking the name of God.

Jesus is the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. (John 1:1)

Even greater evidence is found in Matthew 19:16-17:
16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Jesus is not saying that He isn't good, but simply the true statement that only God is good. This verse is actually used as a proof of Jesus' divinity, used in conjunction with John 10:11 "I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep."

I am afraid that your arguments break down in the face of these verses.

No, the Trinitarian perspective is the only one that actually makes sense of all the verses. Your verses have broken down modalism, not Trinitarianism, which brings together both those verses that show the Son's distinction from the Father, and those that show the Father and the Son are one.

 

[JayJayDee]

The 'biblical truth' as interpreted by a 19th century heretical sect.

I guess the Jews felt the same way about Jesus and his disciples. A first century heretical sect...except that there is no such word as heresy in the Bible.

If people had stuck to the popular view of what was acceptable truth to a Jew, no one would have followed Christ....would they? Those that stuck with the religious leaders of the day, were responsible for putting their own Messiah to death. The devil has a way of making what is right seem wrong...and vice versa. What a clever little devil.

The true Church of Christ can never fall into heresy, this is a promise of Christ himself..

Well actually Jesus foretold exactly that Christianity would fall into apostasy.
The parable of the wheat and the weeds is telling us that the devil is responsible for sowing seeds of false Christianity in the same field as the sower of the fine seed. (Matt 13:24-30, 36-40)

The apostles too foretold this apostasy. Why does the church pretend that it didn't happen? An apostasy from Christianity was beginning in the first century and it was to grow like "weeds" until the harvest time. (Matt 13:24-30, 36-40; 1 Tim 4:1-3; 2 Pet 2:1-3; 2 Tim 2:16-19) Only then was a complete separation to take place.

You are outside of that Church

The apostate one? YES!!! Thank God!

Like I said, can you name me any similarities between first century apostolic Christians and the fourth century Catholic Church instituted by a pagan (sun worshipping) Roman Emperor? I see none.

I can give you a long list of opposites though.

 

[muhammad_isa]

The Son and the Father are distinct, this is true
...
The Trinitarian view is that the Father and Son are distinct Persons, and the Father is the source of the Trinity, begetting the Son and spirating the Holy Spirit. Therefore the Son did come from the Father, and does return to the Father, being the source of the Trinity.

If they are 'distinct persons', then Almighty God is comprised of more than one person..

..but in this post, you say:

God is not made up of parts or components, and each Person of the Trinity is not some fraction of a greater whole. The Father is fully God, the Son is fully God, the Holy Spirit is fully God.

Come off it! Which is it?

 

[Looncall]

Mostly struck me as a deliberately vague bit of woo to make things seem mysterious and interesting.

Probably helped keep all the peasants who couldn't make sense of it in awe of the priests who seemed to understand and have some special knowledge. The fact that it became a central tenet of the religion probably helped keep all the straightforward people at the bottom from asking too many awkward questions too.

I prefer the Mormon take on the trinity. It's less silly.

Hear, hear!

It's just another part of the scam.

 

[Ouroboros]

The argument of Christianity being pagan based on having the 3 deities that are the Trinity is just ridiculous. 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1 isn't that hard to understand, especially when you understand the solar aspects of the symbolism. My question is are these people just anti-religious fundies practicing willful ignorance, is it a straw man, or is there something legitimately hard to understand?

If I understand it right, the version you present of the trinity was labeled a heresy. Jesus is to be considered fully God, not part God. Like this:
Jesus=God
Holy Spirit=God
Father=God
Jesus+HS+Father=God
No division. No modality. It's supposed to be a mystery and non mathematical.

 

[Martellus]

The concept of Trinity: a mere religious bureaucracy made by religious intitutions that has solely brought disagreements, rivalry and, consequently, wars.
In other words, one of those silly dogmas that are able to distort what should be the real purpose of any religions: make people together and try to bring some peace to this decadent world.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

No. The trinity is saying that three "people" are each other. I am not you and you are not me yet we are both human beings (rather than human being and alien).

Trinity does not make sense in a literal way. The Father is a Spirit/being. The Son is a Human. The Holy Spirit is a Spirit/??.

The Father is in the Son who speaks of His Father's teachings. After the resurrection, the Father sends the Holy Spirit to those who wish to believe in His Son who is a representative of His Father.

So they are one in purpose in nature, but they are not one literally.

It's like you and I have spirits. There isn't different type of spirits, so we have the same spirit. We may have the same purposes in life as well. What sets us a part (like twins) is our personality, our nature, and our role in life. We are not each other just as twins are not each other.

The best way I can describe God's unity with Son and His Spirit is twins. If you told one twin that he IS his brother, he'd look at you funny.

The argument of Christianity being pagan based on having the 3 deities that are the Trinity is just ridiculous. 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1 isn't that hard to understand, especially when you understand the solar aspects of the symbolism. My question is are these people just anti-religious fundies practicing willful ignorance, is it a straw man, or is there something legitimately hard to understand?

 

[sojourner]

If they are 'distinct persons', then Almighty God is comprised of more than one person..

..but in this post, you say:


Come off it! Which is it?

Both. Three Persons, one Substance.

 

[sojourner]

The argument of Christianity being pagan based on having the 3 deities that are the Trinity is just ridiculous. 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1 isn't that hard to understand, especially when you understand the solar aspects of the symbolism. My question is are these people just anti-religious fundies practicing willful ignorance, is it a straw man, or is there something legitimately hard to understand?

It's a mythic construct, not a literal construct. This is what happens when ancient and organic thinking becomes usurped by Enlightenment and atomistic thinking. Modern thought calls for "either/or," and "if this, then not that." Ancient thinking had no such construct. Ancient thinking was "both/and," and crossed boundaries of separation demanded by thinking of the world in terms of "constituent parts." The misunderstanding is that the Trinity construct works according to Enlightenment thought.

 

[1137]

It's a mythic construct, not a literal construct. This is what happens when ancient and organic thinking becomes usurped by Enlightenment and atomistic thinking. Modern thought calls for "either/or," and "if this, then not that." Ancient thinking had no such construct. Ancient thinking was "both/and," and crossed boundaries of separation demanded by thinking of the world in terms of "constituent parts." The misunderstanding is that the Trinity construct works according to Enlightenment thought.

Best explanation I've see, can't believe I missed it.