# Does the Christian Trinity violate the Law Of Identity **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 14, 2014, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200 "2014-12-14T12:23:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/41 "2014-12-14T18:35:07Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > You totally ignored **Frylock** ’s question, which was essentially: one _what_? one god ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/42 "2014-12-14T18:40:05Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > As was previously explained, this only works if you insist that monotheism implies only one _person_ is God. That claim is not accepted under classical Christian theism. 1- one is always going to equal one and only one 2- i dont think god is a person ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/43 "2014-12-14T18:44:27Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > What’s the part the doesn’t “make sense, logically speaking”? I don’t know whether you’re trying to use the + and = signs mathematically, but even then, equations like those you wrote all “work” mathematically if all the “letters” are equal to aleph-null. And, for that matter, zero. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/44 "2014-12-14T18:46:41Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > 1- one is always going to equal one and only one Not true. One jury is twelve people, for example. > [@](#): > > 2- i dont think god is a person But you are trying to show that the doctrine of the trinity is contradictory. You can’t show that it’s contradictory by showing it contradicts _what you think_. To show that it’s contradictory, you have to show that it contradicts _itself_. You don’t think God is a person, but classical Christian theism holds that there are, in fact, three people who are god. That my contradict what you think about God, but to convict them of contradiction, you have to show that it contradicts _what they_ think about God. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/45 "2014-12-14T18:49:10Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > 2- i dont think god is a person What do you mean by “person”? Actually, let’s be clear: what’s the issue up for debate here? Is it “The Trinity, as understood by Christian theologians throughout the centuries, violates the Law of Identity”? Or is it “The Trinity, as understood **Robert163** , violates the Law of Identity”? If it’s the former, then you need to make some effort to understand, and use the terms of, standard Christian theology. If it’s the latter, then you don’t, but why should anybody else care? ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/46 "2014-12-14T18:49:11Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > Law Of Identity: > In logic, the law of identity is the first of the three classical laws of thought. It states that “each thing is the same with itself and different from another”. > > Trinity: > Father, Son, Holy Ghost > But can the Christian simply say it is one “power” with three parts??? No, that’s Modalism. You can conceptualize God as a community of three Persons, who love one another so intensely that they can be said to be one. That’s Swinburne’s conception of the ‘social trinity’, and it makes the most sense to me of any model I’ve heard. In denying that there are three gods, as the creeds do, we mean to deny that there are three _independent_ divine entities, which can act on their own and be in conflict with each other (like, say, the gods of the Greeks or the Hindus). I’d flip your question around and ask you: a grove of aspen trees with three separate tree trunks, all of which are genetically identical and share a root network, is that one plant or three? ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/47 "2014-12-14T18:51:02Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > Not true. One jury is twelve people, for example. > > But you are trying to show that the doctrine of the trinity is contradictory. You can’t show that it’s contradictory by showing it contradicts _what you think_. To show that it’s contradictory, you have to show that it contradicts _itself_. > > You don’t think God is a person, but classical Christian theism holds that there are, in fact, three people who are god. That my contradict what you think about God, but to convict them of contradiction, you have to show that it contradicts _what they_ think about God. ok, i am redefining the question. does a christian have any - objective standard - by which they can defend the logical fallacy of law of identity and the trinity. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/48 "2014-12-14T18:54:27Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > I’d flip your question around and ask you: a grove of aspen trees with three separate tree trunks, all of which are genetically identical and share a root network, is that one plant or three? good question! not sure it really applies sine you are talking about tress and i am talking about an abstract concept ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/49 "2014-12-14T19:01:23Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > ok, i am redefining the question. does a christian have any - objective standard - by which they can defend the logical fallacy of law of identity and the trinity. It seems to me that the Law of Identity isn’t going to have any problem with any definition/explanation of the Trinity of the form “God is three X’s but only one Y.” ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/50 "2014-12-14T19:05:38Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > because their definition is illogical In what way is their definition illogical? It may not be justice _as you think it should be practiced_, but that’s not the same thing as illogical. Justice does not have an absolute definition. It is, basically, a term to identify, “what we think is fair and right.” If a jury agrees to let a murderer walk free because of the color of his victim, that’s justice _as they see it._ If a Saudi oil prince decides his son shouldn’t be tried for a crime because he’s rich and he says so, and the courts go along with him, that’s justice _as they see it_. And if God says, “Everyone who says they’re sorry gets to go to heaven, no matter what he’s done,” then that’s justice _as God sees it._ None of these conceptions of justice are illogical, just because they don’t square up to 21st century Western conceptions of the term. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/51 "2014-12-14T19:09:08Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > In what way is their definition illogical? It may not be justice _as you think it should be practiced_, but that’s not the same thing as illogical. Justice does not have an absolute definition. It is, basically, a term to identify, “what we think is fair and right.” If a jury agrees to let a murderer walk free because of the color of his victim, that’s justice _as they see it._ If a Saudi oil prince decides his son shouldn’t be tried for a crime because he’s rich and he says so, and the courts go along with him, that’s justice _as they see it_. And if God says, “Everyone who says they’re sorry gets to go to heaven, no matter what he’s done,” then that’s justice _as God sees it._ None of these conceptions of justice are illogical, just because they don’t square up to 21st century Western conceptions of the term. I would say that Justice indicates what - is - fair and right, not what we think is fair or right. I think objective standards are best. I would certainly not call the christian view of justice to be objective. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/52 "2014-12-14T19:20:02Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > I would say that Justice indicates what - is - fair and right, not what we think is fair or right. I think objective standards are best. I would certainly not call the christian view of justice to be objective. How do you distinguish between what we _think_ is fair and right, and what _really is_ fair and right? What are the objective standards of justice? How do you define them, and how do you demonstrate that they are, in face, objective? ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/53 "2014-12-14T19:24:56Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > How do you distinguish between what we _think_ is fair and right, and what _really is_ fair and right? What are the objective standards of justice? How do you define them, and how do you demonstrate that they are, in face, objective? you know what. i’ve grown tried of talking to you. if you want to call it justice when a Saudi Shiek buys his son out a murder conviction, go ahead, (i don’t think you really actually think that) but i’m just not going to sit here and argue semantics with you. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/54 "2014-12-14T19:33:32Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > How do you distinguish between what we _think_ is fair and right, and what _really is_ fair and right? What are the objective standards of justice? How do you define them, and how do you demonstrate that they are, in face, objective? I dont know. But just because I don’t know everything doesn’t mean I can’t identify something that is clearly wrong, ie, sending Fred to jail to serve the time for Tom’s crime, and letting Tom go free. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/55 "2014-12-14T19:50:10Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > you know what. i’ve grown tried of talking to you. if you want to call it justice when a Saudi Shiek buys his son out a murder conviction, go ahead, (i don’t think you really actually think that) but i’m just not going to sit here and argue semantics with you. No, I certainly don’t think that what goes on in the courts of Saudi Arabia is any kind of real justice. But there’s a lot of people in Saudi Arabia who disagree with me, and think it’s the American courts where there’s no real justice. How do you demonstrate that one of us is right, and one of us is wrong? If you can’t demonstrate that (and your dogged resistance to answering some not-particularly-difficult questions suggest that you can’t) then you have no basis to criticize Christian concepts of justice as illogical or “not real” justice. This isn’t just semantics, it’s pointing out that you fundamentally do not comprehend the terminology of your own argument: justice is not an objective term. It’s a creation of human philosophy, and is by its nature tied to the social mores of the society that spawned it. The idea of what constitutes a crime, and what the appropriate penalty for that crime, is entirely a function of what the people in that society at that time think is right and fair. There is no external check you can make to verify that they have it right. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/56 "2014-12-14T19:59:04Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > No, I certainly don’t think that what goes on in the courts of Saudi Arabia is any kind of real justice. But there’s a lot of people in Saudi Arabia who disagree with me, and think it’s the American courts where there’s no real justice. How do you demonstrate that one of us is right, and one of us is wrong? If you can’t demonstrate that (and your dogged resistance to answering some not-particularly-difficult questions suggest that you can’t) then you have no basis to criticize Christian concepts of justice as illogical or “not real” justice. This isn’t just semantics, it’s pointing out that you fundamentally do not comprehend the terminology of your own argument: justice is not an objective term. It’s a creation of human philosophy, and is by its nature tied to the social mores of the society that spawned it. The idea of what constitutes a crime, and what the appropriate penalty for that crime, is entirely a function of what the people in that society at that time think is right and fair. There is no external check you can make to verify that they have it right. really, and how do you know that’s correct, or is that just what you think??? ---
**Author:** ![PlaceboTarget](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/placebotarget/32/1073_2.png) [@PlaceboTarget](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PlaceboTarget)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/57 "2014-12-14T20:00:22Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > What’s the part the doesn’t “make sense, logically speaking”? I don’t know whether you’re trying to use the + and = signs mathematically, but even then, equations like those you wrote all “work” mathematically if all the “letters” are equal to aleph-null. Trinity can be summarized as follows: 1. God consists of his three hypostases: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. G = F + S + H 1. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are co-equal, co-eternal and cosubstantial. F = S = H 1. Each of the three (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit) is God, whole and entire. F = G S = G H = G This means: F = F + S + H S = F + S + H H = F + S + H How can one aggregate 1), 2) and 3) without violating the Law of Identity? ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/58 "2014-12-14T20:02:56Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > ok, i am redefining the question. does a christian have any - objective standard - by which they can defend the logical fallacy of law of identity and the trinity. 1. There’s no logical fallacy. The Trinity is three _persons_, one _essence_. 2. I just defended it, the Trinity is a community of persons. What is it you aren’t getting? ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/59 "2014-12-14T20:05:33Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > I would say that Justice indicates what - is - fair and right, not what we think is fair or right. I think objective standards are best. I would certainly not call the christian view of justice to be objective. Why not? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200/60 "2014-12-14T20:33:43Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > really, and how do you know that’s correct, or is that just what you think??? Which part of my post are you referring to? The idea that there is no external, absolute morality? Well, since we’re both atheists, what external, objective source on morality do you think we can appeal to? The state? Lots of states in history have instituted justice systems that you and I would both find repugnant. Popular consensus? Popular consensus used to hold that it was just to keep black people as slaves. Our own internal sense of right and wrong? That’s not external, obviously, and clearly lots and lots of people have internal sense of right and wrong that allow them to do things we’d both consider unacceptable. Some other moral/ethical framework? I’m a fan of secular humanism in general, but ultimately that’s a matter of personal preference, not absolute truth. I can’t “prove” that secular humanism is better than Catholic Doctrine, except in so far as it tends towards results I prefer - which is, itself, a subjective determination. If you’re arguing that there’s a non-theistic, external source of perfect morals, what exactly do you imagine it is? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-christian-trinity-violate-the-law-of-identity/707200.md?page=4)