The Trinity

The only ‘obvious’ thing is the Trinity fallacy that so many want to promote. Nails and days in a tomb seem like rather remote ‘things’. The apostles and gospellers gave no recorded significance to them.

Jews do not believe that Jesus’ crucifixion, if it occurred, had any importance. There is nothing mentioned here that is valued by the Jewish heritage. Indeed, they are all more liable to enrage Jews than encourage them.

Is it any more than sentimentality that gives significance to the number of nails? There is no theological significance whatever. The number of nails could have been four, anyway- and was four, imv. Likewise, there is no significance in the number of days in the tomb. It could have been any number- unlike, for instance, the number of baskets of food taken up by the disciples, when the number was everything.

Trinitarianism is neither Jewish nor Christian; it is polytheist. Certain factions approve this teaching because it permits them to demote Jesus, who, as a man, was God, with us, in Christian belief. Iow, he was the manifestation of God, in Christian belief.

Again, Jews give this no significance. There is no indication that there were three seers, other than the presentation of three gifts, or three types of gift. There could have been seventeen of them- and in view of the importance of the event they attended, and the known strong following of seers in Eastern parts, and the ease of travel along a great trade route, there were likely to be at least that many.

No doubt the number three can be found by a simple search. But there will be very few who have any idea what they are looking at, other than a simple number, and if they think they know, they will probably be wrong. The number three, like other numbers, does indeed have significance in the Bible- but it is nothing to do with nails, days or kings, and certainly not polytheism or anything that might be mistaken as polytheism.

Paul wrote that he was ‘determined to know nothing among you, but Christ, and him crucified’. The empty cross is the obvious non-verbal symbol of Christ and Christianity.

3 is also the smallest possible number of sides of a 2-dimensional polygon…which is also known as a triangle, and if Dan Brown is correct, nevermind his horrible writing skills, a triangle is a phallic symbol, so perhaps the “holy trinity” was mean to be phallic as well. wouldn’t surprise me.

Such numbers/quantities are almost always related to metaphorical meanings. A “day” generally (in all literature) refers to a significant occurrence followed by a quieter moment of rest or insignificance. Three days in the tomb has a significant metaphorical relationship. One that I am not going to attempt to discuss with those merely looking for something to complain about. The entire Old Testament is even more so endowed. Such things require a degree of dedication and humility to realize.

Even Paul, who invented Jesus’ divinity, his salvific death, eating food sacrificed to idols, ritual symbolic cannibalism and pooh poohing circumcision, wasn’t going to try to pull that off. The foundational dogma of Judaism, the Shema, which is recited as the opening of morning and evening prayer, is “Hear, O Israel: the Lord is our God, the Lord is One”. In fact, I doubt the idea even occurred to him it was so foreign to Jewish thought. He might as well have tried to tear down the Temple himself.

It took 300 years, “Christianity” being extracted from the Jews, and the first converted Roman emperor demanding that they settle their differences, for it to become dogma for the Church even then.

The concept of the Trinity developed from the conviction of early Christians that God was present in and through the life and activity of Jesus and that the Spirit of God had been “poured out” on the disciples at Pentecost. Trinitarians believe in one God in three “forms”. The convoluted arguments of Trinitarian doctrine are attempt to reconcile the experience of “God within” with the external objective God.

As Paul had “interpreted” Jesus’ character being divine–contrary to anything before or any possible interpretation under Jewish doctrine. Like I said, he’d wouldn’t have dared to suggest a trinity. The Lord our God, the Lord it One.

Convoluted…yes.

Aggh. Dupe.

Right. I don’t think the Trinity is a completely coherent concept. I accept it as a symbol of religious expereince. Of course, I don’t think your notion of God as Truth is completely coherent either. I accept it as interesting and meaningful to you. :slight_smile:

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=174935

^ my brief take on the trinity

i think it has parallels in other religions

How, pray tell, is it incoherent?

As I understand stand it, you define God as Truth. You then state that God is either Truth because God is the creator of the universe as in deism or because, in the absence of such a God, whatever objective truth is, that is how you define what your God is. So your fall back position, does not necessarily follow from the former or vice versa. You would have to establish a logical connection between the God of deism and objective truth. That would seem difficult in so far as you view God as a distant external reality with a non-interventionist policy toward the universe in which objective truth is presumably exists. So the non-interventionist God of deism is incompatible with a God defined as objective truth. Therefore, your notion of God as Truth is incoherent.