Has God begat a son?

Discussion in 'Abrahamic Religions' started by muhammad_isa, Mar 27, 2022.

  1. RJM

    RJM God Feeds the Ravens Admin

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2016
    Messages:
    7,708
    Likes Received:
    1,762
    So 'logical' is obviously not the correct term I was looking for, in relation to the two-slit experiment or Schrodinger's cat.

    Non-intuitive, perhaps?
    Would the same categorisation apply to the principle of the Trinity?
     
    Ella S. likes this.
  2. Tone Bristow-Stagg

    Tone Bristow-Stagg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2021
    Messages:
    389
    Likes Received:
    129
    God gave the Holy Spirit.

    The Holy Spirit is the cause of all the Names and Attributes given of the unknowable, unaccessible God, in both the spiritual and material worlds.


    The Son and Father are but stations of the Annointed Ones, the Christ's, who are known as all the Messengers of God, known by the Names and Stations God has bestowed upon them, they one and all were born into this world via the Holy Spirit. Humanity is conceived of the human spirit and we must be born again with the Spirit of Faith to embrace the Holy Spirit.

    The Oneness of God has now been forever established by the Message given by the Bab (Gate) and Baha'u'llah (Glory of God) and shows clearly how we are all one people on one planet, with One Shepard, God.

    Always happy to discuss. Regards Tony
     
  3. Ella S.

    Ella S. Utilitarian Logician

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2021
    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    474
    Schrodinger's Cat, as popularly understood, actually is illogical because it violates the Law of Noncontradiction. A lot of lay folk interpret the analogy to mean that a particle is in two contradictory states at once but the thought experiment was actually meant to point out that we couldn't know for sure what state a particle is in before we measure it. As such, the real meaning of Schrodinger's Cat is neither illogical nor counter-intuitive.

    I am uncomfortable talking in-depth about The Double-Slit Experiment because I'm not a quantum physicist. From what I've heard from other quantum physicists, it seems that the issue is that the act of measuring particles contaminates the measurement due to the fact that the tools we use to measure them cause them to become entangled. If this is true, then the results of the Double-Slit Experiment aren't really that odd but, again, I'm not a quantum physicist.

    In a sense, theoretical physics (which includes some fields of quantum physics) can be considered illogical because it's primarily a form of metaphysics. It contains whole speculative models and essentially acts as a way to brainstorm ideas that might one day lead to falsifiable hypotheses. These speculations are not based wholly in logical conclusions and, in that sense, you could say that a good portion of theoretical quantum physics is illogical. This was a part of Karl Popper's argument against Logical Positivism since hypotheses play an important role in science despite the fact that they are unverified, which is why science uses the criteria of falsifiability instead of logical verifiability.

    As for the Trinity, it depends on the model. None of the Trinitarian heresies violate any logical axioms and brief descriptions of those are here:
    https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/sdg/Trinitarian Heresies.html

    However, Trinitarianism itself does violate the Law of Identity and would be considered logically impossible since Jesus and God the Father are both wholly identical with God and yet completely separate from each other under Trinitarianism. Most people who believe in the Trinity end up thinking about it in heretical terms without meaning to just because they are more intuitive.
     
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2022
    Thomas likes this.
  4. Thomas

    Thomas Administrator Admin

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    12,028
    Likes Received:
    2,414
    And yet it has been explained how it does not, complex arguments that treat the proposition 'God' as unique.
     
    Ella S. likes this.
  5. Ella S.

    Ella S. Utilitarian Logician

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2021
    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    474
    I have never heard Trinitarianism explained in a way that was logically possible and I've spoken to a lot of priests and theologians of various denominations on the topic. I'd be very interested if you could provide me such an explanation where they all failed.

    If it rests on the proposition that "God" is unique, though, then that's actually still illogical and a form of special pleading. (ETA: Although I don't expect that to be the entirety of your explanation, of course, but it has been for many lay people that I've spoken to.)

    (ETA2: Besides, why does it matter if Trinitarianism is logically impossible? Plenty of believers have conceded that it is but still have faith that God can do the impossible. It's not logical, but they don't care.)
     
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2022
  6. Thomas

    Thomas Administrator Admin

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    12,028
    Likes Received:
    2,414
    OK. Sadly, I'm not competent enough to bite that bullet, much as I would like to. Suffice to say there are objections on the grounds of logic, and those exceptions have their responses ... but yes, it's a tough one, and it doesn't fall within the 'normal' sphere of logical operation, being by its very nature utterly transcendent ... which I know is a 'special pleading', but then it is special.

    Aquinas' First Proof – the First Cause or Unmoved Mover – is not a proof of the Christian God, but an argument in principle, and I have seen the First Cause dismissed as 'special pleading', and defended on the basis that it has to be disproved, and special pleading itself is insufficient, it has to be shown how or why. There's a discussion here.

    Well quite. Again, to paraphrase Aquinas, 'logic' proceeds according to its principles, so we have to determine whether 'special pleading' is a cop-out, or whether actually that 'special case' is nevertheless logically coherent.

    It becomes a circular argument.

    As a Trinitarian Christian, I would say the world is 'Trinity-shaped', that the various triunes in human speculation are intuitions that allude to it. The Platonic triune stasis-kinesis-genesis :: rest-movement-becoming was right, but the wrong way round, Plato's notion of the fall as the eternal soul, in the contemplation of God, turns away and falls into the material world (created to arrest the soul's decline) was 'baptised' by Maximus the Confessor to read genesis-kinesis-stasis, becoming-movement-rest (in God).

    But yes, logically arguing the Trinity is a whole different ballgame!
     
    Ella S. likes this.
  7. Ella S.

    Ella S. Utilitarian Logician

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2021
    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    474
    I have also heard people dismiss the Cosmological Argument as a form of special pleading but I don't think it is in its classical form. It does tend to be botched by some amateur apologists, though, in ways that do become forms of special pleading.

    My issue with the Cosmological Argument is a lot simpler. I don't think there's enough evidence for its premises. I don't think, for example, that we can say that there was a single first mover, for instance.

    While I do think a first mover is more likely than time extending infinitely into the past given the Big Bang (although some physicists have speculated that time in our universe is a sort of infinite loop with a Big Crunch at the end, I don't think there's enough evidence for this) it's hard for me to see why there would be only one mover or why this mover is necessarily God.

    It could be the case, for instance, that out of empty spacetime probability waves generated virtual particles en masse shortly after T=0 which caused the Big Bang. I'm not sure why you would call those waves a singular force or why you would identify that force with God.

    I did read this part. I haven't much to respond to but I found it informative and thought-provoking. I do think that the forms of the Trinity that are most comprehensible to me tend to have a basis in Platonism. Origen is a great source for Neoplatonic thought overlapping with Christian theology and he'd probably be my first pick when talking about it in this context, too.

    The concept of stasis-kinesis-genesis plays a huge role in Agrippa's Occult Philosophy, although I don't think he uses those terms. It always seemed more similar to Modalism than Trinitarianism to me, though.

    Outside of that, I guess my issue is more that there isn't a computational description of Trinitarianism. It can make sense in paraconsistent logic and, indeed, I have read academic papers on that subject published in scholarly journals. I just think it's a misapplication of paraconsistent logic, since it was invented to deal with uncertainty rather than mystery, and I think using paraconsistent logic in an epistemic sense can bring with it a lot of issues. I'm more of a supporter of Bayesian epistemology, personally, for a few technical reasons.
     
    Thomas likes this.

Share This Page