The doctrine of the Trinity

[The Biblicist]

I believe you are pushing the idea that nature demonstrates the Trinity to the extreme. I doubt that you know enough about space, matter, or time to draw the conclusions you have!

Lets see! try a very simple experiment that any child can do. You draw a line on a piece of paper and see if you can only erase one aspect of the space it takes up. Try to simply erase length without erasing both depth and width. Try it! Space is a perfect illustration of the nature of a trinity as you cannot have one point without all points and you cannot erase one point without erasing all points.

Perhaps it is you that does not know sufficiently about time, space and matter to contradict what I said. Try the experiment! Is not the essence of true science observation, repeatability and hypothesis?

 

[The Biblicist]

Lets see! try a very simple experiment that any child can do. You draw a line on a piece of paper and see if you can only erase one aspect of the space it takes up. Try to simply erase length without erasing both depth and width. Try it! Space is a perfect illustration of the nature of a trinity as you cannot have one point without all points and you cannot erase one point without erasing all points.

Perhaps it is you that does not know sufficiently about time, space and matter to contradict what I said. Try the experiment! Is not the essence of true science observation, repeatability and hypothesis?

I challenge any naysayers to put my hypothesis to this simple test. Take a peice of chalk and draw a line on the chalk board. Now try to eliminate only one aspect of space (length, width, depth). Or better yet, try to only provide just one aspect of space on the chalkboard - draw simply width without depth or length - Try it! Notice that length never becomes width or depth. Notice that depth never becomes width or length. Notice that width never becomes depth or length. Distinctively Three but inseparably one.

If you cannot do it, then obviously space is a perfect analogy of a trinity as the whole depends on each aspect and each aspect depends on the whole - that is the concept of a trinity whether applied to science or to the doctrine of God in regard to the Divine Persons. One cannot exist apart from the other Two and the whole depends upon existence of one.

 

[The Biblicist]

repeat

 

[OldRegular]

I challenge any naysayers to put my hypothesis to this simple test. Take a peice of chalk and draw a line on the chalk board. Now try to eliminate only one aspect of space (length, width, depth). Or better yet, try to only provide just one aspect of space on the chalkboard - draw simply width without depth or length - Try it! Notice that length never becomes width or depth. Notice that depth never becomes width or length. Notice that width never becomes depth or length. Three but one.

If you cannot do it, then obviously space is a perfect analogy of a trinity as the whole depends on each aspect and each aspect depends on the whole - that is the concept of a trinity whether applied to science or to the doctrine of God in regard to the Divine Persons. One cannot exist apart from the other Two and the whole depends upon existence of one.

Are you sure you know what a line is? Since you are delving into the world of science and mathematics you cannot simply say a line is a mark on a chalkboard.

Mathematical definition of a line from:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/line

Mathematics: A straight or curved continuous extent of length without breadth.

 

[The Biblicist]

Are you sure you know what a line is? Since you are delving into the world of science and mathematics you cannot simply say a line is a mark on a chalkboard.

A "line" by definition may refer to many different things, but that term always includes one drawn on a paper. Moreover, a line drawn on a chalk board illustrates occupation of space. Are you simply too proud to admit this? An imaginary line or line of sight does not refer to "matter" and its occupation of space. Creation involves matter that occupies space. That is my context and you know it. So why play the deceiver???

The point is that space is length, width and depth and the line on the chalk board illustrates three dimensional space. You fully well know that what I am saying is true in regard to space and you fully well know you cannot over turn the experiment. It is a perfect analogy of the Triune principle. Notice that Romans 1:20 does not say Creation IS trinity just as God IS Trinity, but rather the Godhead is "clearly seen" (recognized, perceived) in the natural order of creation that no blathering can overturn. So why keep blathering nonsense? Try the experiment and see if you can overturn it. You can't and you know it.

 

[HankD]

Easy

High School Plane Geometry: A straight line - is the shortest distance between two points.

High School Physics: Matter - that which has mass and occupies space.

HankD

 

[The Biblicist]

:thumbsup:

Easy

High School Plane Geometry: A straight line - is the shortest distance between two points.

High School Physics: Matter - that which has mass and occupies space.

HankD

:thumbsup: Our context is Creation consisting of mass occupying space in time - Rom. 1:20

 

[HankD]

:thumbsup::thumbsup: Our context is Creation consisting of mass occupying space in time - Rom. 1:20

OK I forgot time. - That which keeps everything from happening at once.

:tongue3:

HankD

 

[OldRegular]

A "line" by definition may refer to many different things, but that term always includes one drawn on a paper. Moreover, a line drawn on a chalk board illustrates occupation of space. Are you simply too proud to admit this? An imaginary line or line of sight does not refer to "matter" and its occupation of space. Creation involves matter that occupies space. That is my context and you know it. So why play the deceiver???

Since you are delving into mathematics and physics you cannot simply make up definitions to suit your self. I gave the mathematical definition of a line and it has nothing to do with a chalkboard! It is you who are being deceptive! Frankly you have gotten in over your head!

 

[percho]

My definition of person:

Man {or woman} is a self-conscious or rational being. He is aware of his existence. He is able to interact and communicate with other men. He recognizes something within himself that distinguishes him from other creatures. That something is his person hood. He is able to discern and perhaps contemplate that which he may call ‘good’, in a moral sense, in the world about him. He is also able to discern that which is less good even ‘evil’ in his world.

Would soul, living apply to your definition?

What enabled him to discern good and evil? Was he created to discern good from evil or was he introduced to the concept thereof?

 

[The Biblicist]

Since you are delving into mathematics and physics you cannot simply make up definitions to suit your self. I gave the mathematical definition of a line and it has nothing to do with a chalkboard! It is you who are being deceptive! Frankly you have gotten in over your head!

Read Hanks response to your nonsense. You are not here for truth but for winning debates at the expense of truth. What I said stands in regard to physics and you know it and so does everyone on this forum. You just can't admit you are wrong as the context of this discussion is not mathematics but natural creation (Rom. 1:20).

Moreover, the point of Romans 1:20 is that creation can reveal the nature of God including His triune nature. Even you cannot deny the illustration of the chalk line in regard to physics is a perfect illustration of the trinity principle, regardless of your diversions.

You can ignore, divert, attempt to confuse but you cannot overthrow the experiment or example I gave and it is found in natural creation in regard to space.

 

[OldRegular]

Read Hanks response to your nonsense. You are not here for truth but for winning debates at the expense of truth.

The truth is you do not know the definition of a line. It is one dimensional!

What I said stands in regard to physics and you know it and so does everyone on this forum. You just can't admit you are wrong as the context of this discussion is not mathematics but natural creation (Rom. 1:20).

You introduced the discussion of time, space, and matter.

Moreover, the point of Romans 1:20 is that creation can reveal the nature of God including His triune nature. Even you cannot deny the illustration of the chalk line in regard to physics is a perfect illustration of the trinity principle, regardless of your diversions.

I do deny it!

You can ignore, divert, attempt to confuse but you cannot overthrow the experiment or example I gave and it is found in natural creation in regard to space.

I disagree with your argument, present the correct definition of a line, and you get your pants in a bind!:laugh::laugh:

 

[percho]

I believe that Jesus is God in the f l e s h, Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

I believe before the foundation of the world, before God said, "Let there be light," that was the plan of, the God.

God would come into the world in f l e s h. How would the God go about doing that?

Here is what the God did:

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: Gen 1:26
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Gen 1:27

We are given more information concerning that in chapter two.

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. V7
And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. V8
And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. V9
and of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou dost not eat of it, for in the day of thine eating of it -- dying thou dost die.' V17 YLT
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. V18
And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. V23 ---- I find it interesting that someone elected to capitalize the M in man.

How is the woman taken from the man created in the image of the God going to be a help meet for the man? The man is going to need salvation. What help is she going to be?

The God, is going to become, in the f l e s h through the woman taken from the man created in the image of the God as, his salvation; The, I Am, the Son of the Living God, The Lord my helper. J E S U S.

Because Jesus, the Son of the Living God, also the seed of Abraham and the seed of David is f l e s h, though sinless, he the living soul will not die because of his sin but will be able to give his l i f e for our sins. The soul that sins it shall die, all have sinned and die in their own sin, they cannot die for someone else's sin because they are sinners and must die for their own. The living soul Jesus was sinless therefore could give his l i f e for our sin. God made the promise of the hope of eternal life for the obedience of the sinless one remaining sinless unto death even the death of the cross. Faith is what, the God believed concerning the obedience of the Son of him to be born of woman. Because the God believed in, the obedient shedding of the blood of the Son, he the God before the foundation of the world made the Son the place of mercy (propitiation). That is what Rom 3:25 states. You do not save yourself because of what you believe.

For God to save us from death, that Satan had the power of before the creation of Adam, God had to come up with a plan by which he could die.
That would be accomplished through the God creating a soul, living from which he would take a help meet, through whom he God could come into the world to die, through his Son.

The purpose of this was to destroy him who had the power of death, the devil, Satan, that old serpent, and to destroy his works. His works were to cause death and corruption to the creation. The works of Satan are destroyed through redemption. Redemption is from death and corruption.

That is why this is true of the creation including the man.

For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; Rom 8:20 The hope was the Son born of woman receiving the promised hope of God. Eternal Life and we are joint heirs with him of the same hope; Titus 3:7 That being justified by his grace,(to his Son born of woman) we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

The trinity, God the Son, could not die.
However God coming in the f l e s h, the only begotten Son, born of woman could and did die, give his sinless life for our sins.

Was it necessary for the Son to go away in order for the helper, the Comforter, the Spirit Holy, the Spirit of Truth to come? Was the Son who went away, given life again from the dead and did the Son receive from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit?

Therefore; ὁ δὲ θεὸς ἤγειρεν αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν The but God raised him from the dead Acts 13:30
Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead; ) Gal 1:1
'For, as the Father doth raise the dead, and doth make alive, John 5:21 YLT
for, as the Father hath life in himself, so He gave also to the Son to have life in himself, John 5:26 YLT

The Father raised his Son, born of woman, from the dead with life in himself.

for if, being enemies, we have been reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved in his life. Romans 5:10 YLT -- What life, his life following his death, the life in himself that came through resurrection.
for neither are they able to die any more -- for they are like messengers -- and they are sons of God, being sons of the rising again. Luke 20:36 --- Is that the same kind of life?


Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Acts 15:18


Someone show me that the above was not the works of the God from the beginning of the world.

 

[percho]

A. Was Satan the means by which the triune(?) God was dealing with man?

B. Was man the means by which the triune(?) God was dealing with Satan?


Why the Father, the Son and the Spirit Holy?

 

[quantumfaith]

You and Greektime are simply wrong. Creation does reveal the Godhead in a perfect analogy. Not in regard to persons but in regard to the nature of a trinity.

There is one universe/creation made up of space, matter and time - it is a Triunity as the whole cannot exist without one part and one part cannot exist without the whole as it is created. Yet space is not matter or time or vice versa.

Space, matter and time are trinities.

Space is length, breadth and depth. Try drawing a line on a chalk board and attempt to erase just one. Can't be done. Try to draw just one without the other two. Can't be done. Yet length is never breadth or depth or vice versa.

Matter is engery, motion and phenomena. Eliminate one and you eliminate the whole, and one cannot exist without the whole existing. Yet energy is not motion or phenomena or vice versa.

Time is future, present and past. Time flows from the future where one exists all exist and where one ceases to exist all cease to exist. Because all of time was once future and all of time was once present and all of time was once past. For example, time now was something in the time future but no longer in time future as it is time now, however, now has passed is no longer now but time past. Yet future is never past or present and vice versa.

If you here are speaking of dimensions (length, width, height) there is much in the world of physics and cosomology to suggest there are more than simply 3 dimensions. In fact, in the mathematical realm we routinely work and perform mathematics in "n" dimensions. Just because you cannot see them does not mean they are non-existent.

 

[The Biblicist]

If you here are speaking of dimensions (length, width, height) there is much in the world of physics and cosomology to suggest there are more than simply 3 dimensions. In fact, in the mathematical realm we routinely work and perform mathematics in "n" dimensions. Just because you cannot see them does not mean they are non-existent.

Let me put an end to this useless jabber and say there is sufficient evidence in natural creation to provide working models of the trinity principle. Natural creation is full of such models.

Secondly, there is no "n" dimension in the chalk drawn line on the board. That is three dimensional. Time is three dimensional. Matter is three dimensional. Natural creation provides analogies so that the principle of trinity can be perceived by the human mind.

These analogies are simple and clear models of a triune concept. However, for educated idiots and theological heretics nothing is simple or clear except the intent to confuse, divert and win arguments at the expense of truth.

 

[percho]

Let me put an end to this useless jabber and say there is sufficient evidence in natural creation to provide working models of the trinity principle. Natural creation is full of such models.

Secondly, there is no "n" dimension in the chalk drawn line on the board. That is three dimensional. Time is three dimensional. Matter is three dimensional. Natural creation provides analogies so that the principle of trinity can be perceived by the human mind.

These analogies are simple and clear models of a triune concept. However, for educated idiots and theological heretics nothing is simple or clear except the intent to confuse, divert and win arguments at the expense of truth.

Hey, I will agree with you that a triangle can describe God, but by the same token would not a circle, square, rectangle or even your straight line also describe God.

That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him: (self?) Eph 1:10 - God all in all.

 

[The Biblicist]

The truth is you do not know the definition of a line. It is one dimensional!

The chalk line on a board is NOT one dimensional but three dimensional as it distincttly has length, width and depth and even a moron can understand that.

I do deny it!

Deny it till your face turns blue but it is still the truth. Nature does provide ample examples to illustrate the truth of a trinity.

I disagree with your argument, present the correct definition of a line, and you get your pants in a bind!:laugh::laugh:

Only an educated idiot would deny that a chalk line is a line. period! There may be more variable applications to the word "line" in math or physics, but a line on a chalk board falls under the definition of a "line" unless you are an educated idiot and can't see past your glasses.

 

[OldRegular]

If you here are speaking of dimensions (length, width, height) there is much in the world of physics and cosomology to suggest there are more than simply 3 dimensions. In fact, in the mathematical realm we routinely work and perform mathematics in "n" dimensions. Just because you cannot see them does not mean they are non-existent.

Thanks QF. I started to bring that up but it would have been characterized as "jabber"!

 

[The Biblicist]

Thanks QF. I started to bring that up but it would have been characterized as "jabber"!

Romans 1:20 says "clearly SEEN" not mental paradigms. A chalk line on a black board has width, depth and length and they are not synonymous but take up space. So what you both are saying is simply "jabber." Get real!