# 3 in 1 had a son? / Doctrine of the Trinity a logical contradiction? \[merged threads\] **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 11, 2013, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811 "2013-01-11T01:40:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![virtually\_yours](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a587f6/32.png) [@virtually\_yours](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/virtually_yours)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/101 "2013-01-15T17:29:46Z")
> [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > (A) You are assuming that “God is the Father” means they are _identical_; which is not what Christians believe. > (B) You are assuming God is a creature like ourself with a single, unitary mode of being… which is also not what Christians believe. What I have noticed is that what christians say and what they believe are two different things.. they say the father is god the son is god the spirit is god but there are not three gods. if the father and the son have no beginning nor ending then they are each God and identical, you cant have differences between one God and another they must be perfectly the same! One not more or less perfect/supreme than the other. > [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > (Actually, let me expand upon that last part. Christians (barring a few tiny subsects including Jehovah’s Witnesses) believe that any man is composed of _two_ parts: the soul and the body. It is important to understand that _neither_ of these is the complete human being. Not even after they die. you but there are not three bodies or three souls! the body is not the soul vice versa. I have never heard someone say the human is three bodies or souls in one. they say there are three persons in one, each person has no beginning nor ending! vyVY ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/102 "2013-01-15T18:05:46Z")
> [@virtually\_yours](#): > > The executive accountant maybe, keeping an eye on things? > vyVY My analogy, earlier in this thread, had the Holy Spirit as sort of a cosmic Customer Service and Technical Support hotline. > [@Frylock](#): > > Christians affirm that God died on the cross and was resurrected, AFAIK. I’ve just read comments to that effect in the past few days from a very devout and doctrinally oriented Catholic for example. This is accurate. I might point out that one of the internal-to-Christianity arguments revolves around Mary, whom the Catholics title “Mother of God,” not in the Cybele sense, but in the very valid one that the baby to whom she gave birth, Jesus, was God the Son, so therefore as His mother the title fits her. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/103 "2013-01-15T18:23:29Z")
> [@virtually\_yours](#): > > What I have noticed is that what christians say and what they believe are two different things.. they say the father is god the son is god the spirit is god but there are not three gods. if the father and the son have no beginning nor ending then they are each God and identical, you cant have differences between one God and another they must be perfectly the same! One not more or less perfect/supreme than the other. > > you but there are not three bodies or three souls! the body is not the soul vice versa. I have never heard someone say the human is three bodies or souls in one. they say there are three persons in one, each person has no beginning nor ending! vyVY And Achilles can never overtake the tortoise, and it is impossible to count from one to three because thare are an infinite numger of rational numbers between one and three. There are in fact distinctions between the three Persons of the Trinity. Creating facile absolute statements and “proving” they are mutually contradictory is not good logic. Although all matter is composed of protons,. electrons and neutrons arranged in atoms which join together in obedience to chemical laws, I find it very easy to distinguish between air, water, and sandstone. Remember that theology is in origin a science, not a system of logic – it’s an attempt to speak meaningfully about, and comprehend, an entity people claim to have encountered. Plus, let me remark on Oscar Wilde’s witticism. When he claimed to be able to ad lib a bon mot on any subject his kistenders amed, one of his interlocutors proposed “the Queen” (Victoria) “Ah,” said Wilde, “but Her Majesty is not a subject!” One of the problems the social sciences encounter is that its subject matter refuses to be objects which hold still for analytic study – the subjects of study are people like unto the studiers. Even more so would this be true of a creator being ontologically greater than those presuming to study him. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/104 "2013-01-15T18:25:12Z")
For some reason, I can’t read “3 in 1 had a son” without mentally adding “ee-i-ee-i-o”.☹ ---
**Author:** ![virtually\_yours](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a587f6/32.png) [@virtually\_yours](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/virtually_yours)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/105 "2013-01-16T00:11:06Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > For some reason, I can’t read “3 in 1 had a son” without mentally adding “ee-i-ee-i-o”.☹ same here vy ---
**Author:** ![virtually\_yours](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a587f6/32.png) [@virtually\_yours](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/virtually_yours)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/106 "2013-01-16T00:14:07Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > And Achilles can never overtake the tortoise, and it is impossible to count from one to three because thare are an infinite numger of rational numbers between one and three. > > There are in fact distinctions between the three Persons of the Trinity. Creating facile absolute statements and “proving” they are mutually contradictory is not good logic. Although all matter is composed of protons,. electrons and neutrons arranged in atoms which join together in obedience to chemical laws, I find it very easy to distinguish between air, water, and sandstone. > > Remember that theology is in origin a science, not a system of logic – it’s an attempt to speak meaningfully about, and comprehend, an entity people claim to have encountered. > . Yes but three distinct _sandstones_ can never be _one_ air or water.. they say three persons are one God. They dont leave it as three persons vy ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/107 "2013-01-16T00:35:29Z")
According to traditional doctrine, God is not a being as we usually think of it, but an Aristotelian _Substance_. Virtually no one believes in Aristotelian _Substances_ any more, which is a bit of a problem for traditional theology these days. Modern theologians generally fall into one of three camps. Catholic theologians are generally among the very few who continue to understand the world in Aristotelian terms, effectively rejecting much modern philosophy. A few Protestants and Catholics are among the even smaller school of those who attempt to adapt the traditional doctrine to modern philosophical concepts, but only a tiny number of people have both the philosophical chops and the theological interest to understand those who do so, and they don’t necessarily agree with one another. The rest follow Rousseau, quoted by Bertrand Russell, quoted by **BrainGlutton** and fall back on belief as something non-rational. These are the ones who proclaim it to be merely a mystery, but it is worth pointing out that to those who developed the doctrine, although they also called it a mystery, did not equate that with something incomprehensible or illogical. It made rational sense to them. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/108 "2013-01-16T00:50:13Z")
> [@Alan\_Smithee](#): > > …It made rational sense to them. Through faith of course. Which I’ve mentioned over and over it’s not debatable. A as is the non-sense of this thread. Believe it? Fine. Debate it? Forget it. ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/109 "2013-01-16T01:15:59Z")
Also, to those who developed the doctrine (and those who still believe it as Aristotelians) the Father and Son are _not_ identical with God precisely because God is a _Substance_ while the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are _persons_, which is an entirely different category of object. As an analogy, two rocks may both be granite but obviously neither one is identical with granite, nor is one rock identical with the other. You can paint one rock blue and bury it in your yard and carve the other one into a statue. They have different characteristics, but each one is granite, in what I consider to be a perfectly natural sense of the word “is.” You might say that despite being two separate things, both are examples of the same substance, namely granite. According to the Aristotelian philosophy developed by Christian theologians, it would be more precise to say that they are of similar _Substance_. Although you _could_ say (somewhat imprecisely) that the _Substance_ as well as the substance of each rock is granite, they are clearly not composed of the _same_ granite, but of two bits of granite. The _Substances_ are therefore similar, but not identical. The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, however, have the same _Substance_. The _Substance_ of the Father is identical to the _Substance_ of the Son is identical to the _Substance_ of the Holy Spirit. Nevertheless, the Father is a _person_, not a _Substance_. Nor is the Father the same person as the Son or the Holy Spirit, or Holy Spirit the same person as the Son. They are like three pebbles composed not of similar pieces of granite, but of the _same_ granite. How _that_ happens is what Aquinas, for example, considered a mystery, since nothing like that is possible with physical things, but the phenomenon itself was considered explicable. The problem is that when you read me saying “They are like three pebbles composed not of similar pieces of granite, but of the _same_ granite,” you imagine that I mean the same molecules and atoms, the same quarks and electrons, somehow existing in three places at once, but pre-modern Aristotelians had no concept of atoms or quarks (Democritus notwithstanding). To them, what made granite granite was not the molecular structure of atoms of silicone and oxygen, but something abstract and nearly mystical, more akin to Justice or Square-ness than to something like an atom. That’s what _Substance_ was, and without that, the whole thing becomes nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/110 "2013-01-16T01:20:58Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Through faith of course. Which I’ve mentioned over and over it’s not debatable. A as is the non-sense of this thread. Believe it? Fine. Debate it? Forget it. Not sure what you mean, or how you’ve mentioned something over and over when this is your first post in this thread. I don’t believe any of it; it’s all pre-scientific nonsense, God especially, but I love debating it. Who are you to tell me I shouldn’t? If it weren’t for debates like this, I’d still be a Christian, which is proof enough for me that these debates do make a difference and are useful. ---
**Author:** ![virtually\_yours](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a587f6/32.png) [@virtually\_yours](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/virtually_yours)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/111 "2013-01-16T02:24:30Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Through faith of course. Which I’ve mentioned over and over it’s not debatable. A as is the non-sense of this thread. Believe it? Fine. Debate it? Forget it. The hindus have faith the monkey god came and saved them, so they worship the monkey god.. so its not enough to just have faith, even the bible says prove all things hold fast to that which is good. how will you prove to the hindu there is no monkey god if you dont debate? vyVY ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/112 "2013-01-16T02:47:41Z")
Could you drop this nonsense about the Hindu monkey god? It’s one thing to debate a religion but there’s no need to be disrespectful. ---
**Author:** ![virtually\_yours](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a587f6/32.png) [@virtually\_yours](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/virtually_yours)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/113 "2013-01-16T06:01:32Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Could you drop this nonsense about the Hindu monkey god? It’s one thing to debate a religion but there’s no need to be disrespectful. Nonsense? Disrespectful? I watched a documentary on natgeo and that what they called it, the monkeygod festival! They had a monkey image and had great processions for the monkeygod [Celebrating traditional Chinese festivals in Hong Kong | Hong Kong Tourism Board](http://www.discoverhongkong.com/eng/see-do/events-festivals/chinese-festivals/monkey-god-festival.jsp) this one is hong kong but the one i saw was in india.. google before you doogle please vyVY ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/114 "2013-01-16T16:51:21Z")
Hanuman is one aspect of one god in the Hindu pantheon. And he wasn’t actually a monkey; he was a god that could change his shape into animals. You’re taking one small aspect of an entire religion, removing all its context, describing it in a belittling way, and acting like it’s the entirety of the faith. ---
**Author:** ![virtually\_yours](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a587f6/32.png) [@virtually\_yours](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/virtually_yours)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/115 "2013-01-16T17:42:17Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Hanuman is one aspect of one god in the Hindu pantheon. And he wasn’t actually a monkey; he was a god that could change his shape into animals. You’re taking one small aspect of an entire religion, removing all its context, describing it in a belittling way, and acting like it’s the entirety of the faith. So you need to inform millions of hindus of this fact, that he wasn’t actually a monkey.. I’d like to see you do that on the day of the monkey god festival.. should be very interesting. . btw that is what it’s called (monkey festival)and they have a statue of a monkey. If you find it offensive it is because a monkey god is offensive,. but you want to blame the messenger and skirt around the message. I just called it what thet called it. vy VY ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/116 "2013-01-16T20:49:24Z")
You need to get your facts straight, **virtually yours**. First of all, a little Googling would reveal that you’ve conflated the Hindu deity Hanuman with the Chinese folk hero-cum-Taoist god Sun Wukong, the Money God or Monkey King. The latter is in fact believed to be a monkey and is worshiped as a god. The former is not a monkey, and it is belittling to refer to him as such. (Whether such belittlement is justified is another mater, but don’t be disingenuous and pretend that you’re reporting neutral facts here. Your purpose is clearly to belittle.) Secondly, no one has faith in Sun Wukong, the Monkey King. Whether anyone has faith in Hanuman is very much debatable. They are indeed both worshiped, but _faith_ in the sense you’re using it, to mean a non-rational basis for belief, is almost entirely a modern Christian concept. Hanuman has a complex theology associated with him, including both philosophical and popular ideas about his reality and the nature and justification of belief. Whether any of this is analogous to the Christian idea of faith is something a doper like **Anaamika** might be able to answer; I simply don’t know, though I doubt that a Hindu would say that they believe “through faith” unless they had been heavily exposed to 20th/21st century American-style Protestantism. From what I can tell, there is almost certainly no such complex belief system surrounding Sun Wukong. He is a folk hero popularized by a 16th century novel. There are a couple of Taoist temples where he is worshiped as a god, but I would hesitate to draw too close a comparison between Chinese “folk religion”/Taoism and either Christianity or Hinduism. There are worshipers who believe that Sun Wukong can possess their bodies and grant them miracles, but belief in objective (false) phenomena like miracles is a very different phenomenon than believing because you have “faith.” ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/117 "2013-01-16T21:04:10Z")
> [@virtually\_yours](#): > > so who are these three then? they say each is distinct and individual, and each has no beginning or end. so that’s three distinct individual no beginning or enders, wouldnt that be three distinct individual gods? > > vyVY You’re expecting it to make sense. It doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t purport to make sense. ---
**Author:** ![virtually\_yours](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a587f6/32.png) [@virtually\_yours](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/virtually_yours)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/118 "2013-01-16T21:51:59Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > You’re expecting it to make sense. It doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t purport to make sense. then everyone can get into heaven with any kind of belief and interpretation of their _scriptures_. the bible says prove all things, hold fast to that which is good… vyVY ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/119 "2013-01-16T22:01:31Z")
> [@virtually\_yours](#): > > then everyone can get into heaven with any kind of belief and interpretation of their _scriptures_. the bible says prove all things, hold fast to that which is good… > vyVY And if everyone could get into heaven that would be a problem to you? Anyway, the Bible is fascinating to read and try to understand, but I wouldn’t recommend following its advice or believing anything you read there. Why should anyone care what it says to do? ETA: But yes, I do agree that it does purport to make sense, for certain values of “making sense,” at least. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811/120 "2013-01-16T22:22:54Z")
A circle, an ellipse, and a hyperbola have no end points, no angles, are all curved, all conic sections – gee, perhaps we should pray to the monkry god for the ability to tell them apart? If that little excursion into sardonics was not pellucid enough, the three persons of the Trinity are very easily distinguished from each other by their functions. In fact one of them spells out the differences and the inherent union in an extended discourse at John 13:31-16:35. To be sure, it doesn’t say, the characterists of Person X are A, B, and C step by step for the three of them – that wasn’t its purpose. But it does make clear their purpose, functions, and interrelationships. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/3-in-1-had-a-son-doctrine-of-the-trinity-a-logical-contradiction-merged-threads/646811.md?page=7)