# Is the Christian Trinity Incoherent? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 16, 2009, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422 "2009-12-16T00:22:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![CJJ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecc23a/32.png) [@CJJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CJJ)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/81 "2009-12-17T04:45:07Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Christianity has lots of gods, the Blessed Trinity is just one trap they had to weasel out of. The Virgin Mary can do miracles and answer prayers. Does that make her a god? There are angel that talk to god and are invisible. Are they not gods? There are devils minions trotting around doing the devils work… > > Just face it, Christianity is a polytheistic religion. There is no shame in that. That is just the way it is. As I stated earlier, I am not a defender of the trinity–I do not believe such a thing exists–but this statement blithely disregards a whole boatload of Christian thought on these subjects in general and the trinity in particular. Choosing not to believe it is one thing–it certainly requires one to accept premises based on revelation (I’m thinking of the usual Bible verses–Matthew 28:19, John 10:30, the benediction in 2nd Corinthians, the three visitors in Genesis)–but IMO **gonzomax** is making a gross caricature. It is the equivalent of pointing and laughing at “silly quantum physicists” who have to “weasel out” of the “trap” that a photon can be two different things at once. Many QED fields are explained by “virtual” particles, which by definition cannot be observed–isn’t this just a rationalization to preserve your precious theory in the face of overwhelming common sense? Let me be clear: These objections to quantum physics are ridiculous, and can only be seriously entertained by someone who hasn’t taken the time to understand the subject. My point is simply that great minds have applied themselves to this problem and have come up with some plausible interpretations, and many of these will explain the trinity in a coherent way. Again, that doesn’t mean the trinity is a real thing, but since [when](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=543257) has that [stopped](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=541687) people on [this board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=539614) from reasoning about entirely hypothetical subjects? I don’t see half as much ridicule (but twice as much actual reasoning) regarding the various powers of Superman, but when it’s a religious topic we quickly turn from “fighting ignorance” to “point and laugh”. Why is that? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/82 "2009-12-17T04:54:30Z")
God talking to himself isn’t really the issue (though _praying_ to oneself is a little weird) so much as the clear implication that these are different pesrons with different wills. “Not my will, but thine be done.” How can God have two different wills? ---
**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 17, 2009, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/83 "2009-12-17T04:55:43Z")
[“You just don’t like that I’m turning a rational eye to your dogma.”](http://xkcd.com/675/) ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/84 "2009-12-17T05:03:12Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > [“You just don’t like that I’m turning a rational eye to your dogma.”](http://xkcd.com/675/) This is a funny comic, but it’s not really analogous since theology has no scientific or empirical underpinnings, but only starts with asumptions. I don’t think the problems with the Trinity (or some other theological problems like the POE) are anything new, or that people haven’t tried for millenia to resolve them, but I do know that none of them have ever been successful. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/85 "2009-12-17T05:21:57Z")
> [@CJJ](#): > > I don’t see half as much ridicule (but twice as much actual reasoning) regarding the various powers of Superman, but when it’s a religious topic we quickly turn from “fighting ignorance” to “point and laugh”. Why is that? Maybe because nobody feels as though they have personally insulted when you point out that Superman is a fictional character? ---
**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:** [December 17, 2009, 8:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/86 "2009-12-17T08:48:49Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > God talking to himself isn’t really the issue (though _praying_ to oneself is a little weird) so much as the clear implication that these are different pesrons with different wills. > > “Not my will, but thine be done.” > > How can God have two different wills? I completely get that it then makes them difficult to reconcile as one being (which is the whole point), but why would three distinct people _not have_ three different wills? ---
**Author:** ![Cullain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d26b3c/32.png) [@Cullain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cullain)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 10:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/87 "2009-12-17T10:51:09Z")
CEO, CFO, CTO are all part of GoNoGoCo. CTO can call the CEO, but that doesn’t change the fact that all 3 are part of the trinity that makes GoNoGoCo, correct? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/88 "2009-12-17T11:42:46Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > I completely get that it then makes them difficult to reconcile as one being (which is the whole point), but why would three distinct people _not have_ three different wills? Of course three distinct people would have three different wills; no one on either side of the debate seems to have a problem with that part. It’s only the “difficulty” in reconciling three distinct people with three different wills one being – which folks one one side say is a mystery that doesn’t make sense and is illogical while folks on the other side say, _er, no, there’s nothing mysterious about that; it doesn’t make sense because it’s incoherent._ ---
**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:** [December 17, 2009, 11:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/89 "2009-12-17T11:54:13Z")
> [@Cullain](#): > > CEO, CFO, CTO are all part of GoNoGoCo. CTO can call the CEO, but that doesn’t change the fact that all 3 are part of the trinity that makes GoNoGoCo, correct? That’s not a trinity, it’s just a collection of three things. ---
**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:** [December 17, 2009, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/90 "2009-12-17T11:58:26Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Of course three distinct people would have three different wills; no one on either side of the debate seems to have a problem with that part. It’s only the “difficulty” in reconciling three distinct people with three different wills one being – which folks one one side say is a mystery that doesn’t make sense and is illogical while folks on the other side say, _er, no, there’s nothing mysterious about that; it doesn’t make sense because it’s incoherent._ I see nothing to disagree with here. On one side, you’ve got people who fully expect the thing to violate the rules to which every other known thing is subject. -They’re both actually making the same statement (it is incoherent), it’s just that believers consider that a feature, not a flaw. ---
**Author:** ![Random\_Design](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/58f4c7/32.png) [@Random\_Design](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Random_Design)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/91 "2009-12-17T13:42:44Z")
> [@chacoguy](#): > > But, of course, you’d get banned. 😉 What if he was the moderator too? ---
**Author:** ![StarvingButStrong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/starvingbutstrong/32/335_2.png) [@StarvingButStrong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/StarvingButStrong)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/92 "2009-12-17T15:25:04Z")
BTW, where/why did it become a Trinity? How did a “holy spirit” get, um, created and elevated to the same status as the Father and Son? ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/93 "2009-12-17T15:41:36Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > My claim is that none of those claims require one to believe in a mystery that people can’t even begin to understand; they’re all rather straightforward propositions (which also doesn’t seem bigoted). Oh, there are plenty of incoherencies in the Torah as well as in the New Testament. For example, how is it that God created day and night on the first day, but didn’t create the _sun_ until the fourth day? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/94 "2009-12-17T15:54:41Z")
> [@StarvingButStrong](#): > > BTW, where/why did it become a Trinity? How did a “holy spirit” get, um, created and elevated to the same status as the Father and Son? Trinities were common in pre-Christian pagan traditions, and Christianity was lousy with pagan influence (and declining Jewish influence) by the time of the Nicean Council. The Christian Trinity was an attempt to save Christianity from pagan polytheism as much as anything else. As **Measure for Measure** said, Nicea was also partially an attempt by Constantine to make the Church fathers agree on a unified theology, but it wasn’t entirely successful. They came up with an official creed, but they only did so by shutting out the Araianists. ---
**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:** [December 17, 2009, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/95 "2009-12-17T15:59:41Z")
> [@StarvingButStrong](#): > > BTW, where/why did it become a Trinity? How did a “holy spirit” get, um, created and elevated to the same status as the Father and Son? In case you meant how does the doctrine account for it, it says it was always that way. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/96 "2009-12-17T16:07:09Z")
The Holy Spirit, specifically, got into it because of Matthew’s “Commission” in Mt. 28:19 to baptize “in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.” ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2009, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/97 "2009-12-18T02:53:09Z")
> [@spoke-](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > My claim is that none of those claims require one to believe in a mystery that people can’t even begin to understand; they’re all rather straightforward propositions (which also doesn’t seem bigoted). > > Oh, there are plenty of incoherencies in the Torah as well as in the New Testament. For example, how is it that God created day and night on the first day, but didn’t create the _sun_ until the fourth day? Well, (a) that doesn’t apply to the particular claims referenced in the quoted passage there, but also (b) we could explain that away by figuring God created some other light before creating the sun. That’d be weird, but it’s a different _ **kind** _ of weird than explicitly claiming that God created the sun on the first day and didn’t create the sun until the fourth day. Still, forget the Torah for a moment. The point isn’t whether this or that other religion happens to involve an incoherence; the point is that we could whip up a religion that involves no such incoherence. We could postulate a God who brings some people back from the dead, or a God who brings no people back from the dead, with no conceptual trouble; we can’t, though, likewise postulate a God who brings some people back from the dead and brings no people back from the dead – which is incoherent in a way that religious claims (a) don’t need to be, but (b) sometimes are. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2009, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/98 "2009-12-18T03:21:25Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > God talking to himself isn’t really the issue (though _praying_ to oneself is a little weird) so much as the clear implication that these are different persons with different wills. > > “Not my will, but thine be done.” > > How can God have two different wills? Many people experience feelings of ambivalence now and then. They can be said to have more than one will. But in that passage, Jesus speaks to the Father as if He was a separate person. But that could be chalked up to human language. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2009, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/99 "2009-12-18T04:06:26Z")
The more parsimonious explanation is simply that the Gospels were written before the Trinity was invented. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2009, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422/100 "2009-12-18T04:53:53Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > The Holy Spirit, specifically, got into it because of Matthew’s “Commission” in Mt. 28:19 to baptize “in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.” And also the “Other Comforter” referenced in John 14. I find it extremely difficult to understand why persons not motivated at the need to scoff at beliefs they do not share find the basic principle of Trinitarian theology so absurd and ‘incoherent.’ Without the Scholastic, Aristotelian, and Neoplatonic philosophical language added, it simplifies to: 1. There is one God. 2. This God is the same God who inspired the Law and Prophets, the one worshiped by Jews. 3. This God is somehow so infused in the man Jesus of Nazareth that it is an accurate statement that ‘to know Jesus is to know God.’ 4. In his human capacity, Jesus exemplified how to know and love this God, addressing Him by the affectionate term for Father. 5. So from one frame of reference Jesus is equivalent to God and from another, He is one subservient to God, modeling His life after God’s will. 6. Scores of people throughout history have testified to the life-changing experience of having the Spirit of this God at work within them, renewing and transforming them. 7. This is in accord with Jesus’s promise of the Spirit and with the experience of the earliest Christians, as recorded in Acts and the Epistles. 8. So there is in some way three distinct ways in which God is manifest to man, corresponding to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – and yet there is but one God. The Greeks found it useful to say there was a single _ousia_ manifest in three _hypostases_, which in Latin was rendered one _substantia_ and three _personae_, the latter usage being Englished as one substance and three persons. But this is metaphysical conceptualization, doctrine or dogma rather than core belief. One believes in the Dogma of the Trinity in the same sense as one believes in Keynesian economics or the symbology of James Joyce’s novels; one believes in the God it describes in the sense one believes in one’s spouse or closest friend as a person in whom one can put full trust. The facile F=G, S=G, HS=G, but F!=S!=HS, hence contradictory argument is at fault for the same reason that “cats are animals, dogs are animals, but dogs are not cats, therefore the whole thing is absurd” falls to pieces. As the great philosopher W.J. Clinton was wont to say, “It all depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is.” 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-christian-trinity-incoherent/521422.md?page=6)