How is the trinity coherent?

[Dragon fang]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/Shield-Trinity-Scutum-Fidei-English.svg/2000px-Shield-Trinity-Scutum-Fidei-English.svg.png

So basically trinity is:
Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, the Father is God, each of them is a full and perfect God, and Jesus is not the Father, and the Holy Spirit is not Jesus, despite that the three Gods are one God.

That is either internal incoherence or that isn't English.

Lets go through the sun analogy, so the Father is the source of the sun, and the son is the light, and the holy spirit is the heat. Well, the analogy just refuted trinity.

First of all, the sun is what is being described, and heat and light are inseparable properties of the sun. You can't have a man somewhere, and his kindness somewhere else.

Furthermore, heat and light are contingent, meaning that they are created and not eternal. (God is not eternal?)
If we assume that they are part of God's nature (ie. God is wisdom, knowledge and reason is the Son, life is the Holy Spirit). So... can we have a God that doesn't have wisdom, knowledge, or life? So there is no objection in dividing God into more persons then?
If one of them is an actual perfect God, then what is the need for other persons?

X+Y+Z=1, and the three variables are equal then each of them is equal 1/3. If one of them equals one, then the other two are equal zero.
I've heard that it is actually 1x1x1=1, but it is more like 3x1=1, DollarXPennyXEuro=?, or PeachXTomatoXApple=...something else.


Bottom line is: Either the three persons are equal, but they are partially divine (1/3 each), in which no God actually exists.
Or the three persons are equal in essence, and all represents one God, leading to three different Gods.

It is non-sense that the three persons are equal in essence, all represents one God, but their addition equals one God.

[Soyeong]

Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, the Father is God, each of them is a full and perfect God, and Jesus is not the Father, and the Holy Spirit is not Jesus, despite that the three Gods are one God.

The best analogy I've seen is that the Trinity is like resonance structures of nitrate.  One molecule is all three structures at the same time and never just one.  Another good analogy is seven blind men who are touching a different part of an elephant: the tail, nose, leg, flank, trunk, tusk, and ear.  Each is sensing a different aspect of the elephant that is distinct, yet it's all still one elephant.  In a similar way, when someone saw Jesus, they were like the blind men in sensing one aspect of God. 

First of all, the sun is what is being described, and heat and light are inseparable properties of the sun. You can't have a man somewhere, and his kindness somewhere else.

Furthermore, heat and light are contingent, meaning that they are created and not eternal. (God is not eternal?)

The point of an analogy is to say that these specifically mentioned properties that one familiar thing has are like these other specifically mentioned properties that something unfamiliar has, so it is something that you should be trying to understand rather than trying to refute.  You can't actually refute an analogy unless the specific properties being compared aren't actually like each other.  Looking at other properties that weren't being compared, like contingency, is completely irrelevant precisely because it wasn't being compared.

If we assume that they are part of God's nature (ie. God is wisdom, knowledge and reason is the Son, life is the Holy Spirit). So... can we have a God that doesn't have wisdom, knowledge, or life? So there is no objection in dividing God into more persons then?
If one of them is an actual perfect God, then what is the need for other persons?

Something that appears differently from different angles does not mean that the whole lacks a part that you are not seeing from a certain angle.

X+Y+Z=1, and the three variables are equal then each of them is equal 1/3. If one of them equals one, then the other two are equal zero.
I've heard that it is actually 1x1x1=1, but it is more like 3x1=1, DollarXPennyXEuro=?, or PeachXTomatoXApple=...something else.

Again, 1x1x1 is one way to try to help you to understand, but if you want to throw in other irrelevant variables, then it will only hinder your understanding.

[Will]

I don't think direct analogies should be used.  That being said, I prefer the analogy as to why analogies don't work.  James Anderson uses it in his book on paradox in Christian Theology.  In condensed form, he asks one to imagine a two dimensional world where flatlanders live.  "God" enters this two dimensional world and reveals that he is both circular and rectangular at the same time.  Within their world, this is a necessary contradiction.  They lack the cognitive equipment to think or perceive a cone.  So, while this doesn't answer what God is in the biblical sense, it addresses whether a Christian can be justified in affirming two truths that appear to be in conflict (God is unity and God is diversity).  The more I think about it, the more satisfying the answer becomes.  It's what you would expect if there is truly a creator/creature distinction.   

[Robert Harris]

Only 120 days since someone last posted in this thread... just ripe for a response!

The Father, Son, and Spirit are all three persons that make up the one being of God. It is not the case that the Father-a god-and the Son-another god-along with the Spirit-yet an additional god-make up what is presently and historically referred to as the Trinity. This is a contradiction.

You can think of it as God is so richly endowed that he has three sets of rational faculties each sufficient to be what we consider persons. God is tri-personal.

[Aaron Massey]

Only 120 days since someone last posted in this thread... just ripe for a response!

The Father, Son, and Spirit are all three persons that make up the one being of God. It is not the case that the Father-a god-and the Son-another god-along with the Spirit-yet an additional god-make up what is presently and historically referred to as the Trinity. This is a contradiction.

You can think of it as God is so richly endowed that he has three sets of rational faculties each sufficient to be what we consider persons. God is tri-personal.

Are these persons Co-equal?

[Robert Harris]

Depends on what you mean by co-equal. I currently hold that they are all ontologically equal but there is a sort of hierarchy between them. Such as a husband and wife are of the same ontological value but the husband is the 'head of the house.'

[Aaron Massey]

Depends on what you mean by co-equal. I currently hold that they are all ontologically equal but there is a sort of hierarchy between them. Such as a husband and wife are of the same ontological value but the husband is the 'head of the house.'

From my understanding if one is greater than the other the trinity can not work. As they are all co-equal.

[Robert Harris]

From my understanding if one is greater than the other the trinity can not work. As they are all co-equal.

How come it would not work? Keep in mind they are ontologically equal. Having a hierarchy of authority does nothing to diminish their equality of person or being.

[SPF]

They are co-equal in essence.  Meaning, each person of the Trinity is fully God. 

Philosophically speaking, we can say that God is a MGB.  What attributes are applied to a MGB may be debated, but I think we can generally accept a number of them, such as eternality, omniscience, and omnipotence.  What we can say then is that if God exists, He is maximally perfect, He is ontologically a MGB. God's essence is maximally perfect.

God does not possess potential, he is utterly perfect in His essence.

Imagine then that God is a Triune God.  What this means then is that His essence is One.  Even if the Godhead is Triune, meaning we have three persons, the essence of each is identical.  They are always in unison, they are always in harmony, they always agree, and they always act the same.  Why? Because God is perfect.  There are no warring parts, no disagreements, no desire for one member to be anything other than what He is – because in His essence He is God.

There is total perfection in the Triune relationship.  You have The Father, The Son, and The Spirit all in essence are God. All are YHWH.  Their essence is the same, you cannot distinguish them in this fashion.  They are One God. This is logically valid, though it is mighty close to incomprehensible. Philosophically a Triune God works.

Now, what philosophy can't do, and this is where you turn to theology - is trying to understand how a Triune God relates to Himself. This is where we simply have to say it's incomprehensible.  Scripture teaches that God is Triune.  Scripture teaches that there are three persons in the Godhead, recognized as the Father, Jesus, and the Spirit. Each functions differently and has a different role in how they operate, yet their essence is the same - it would necessarily have to be if each person was God.

If a triune God was not identical in essence, then either none, one, or two of the members would constitute the Godhead. 

[Διό]

The difficulty in naming a committed formal fallacy suggests that the problem is in our comprehension rather than it's coherence.

[Lane7]

I found the following concise, apologetic description to be quite helpful, especially when witnessing to Muslims who always make a 'bee-line' to the Trinity's supposed incoherence  in an attempt to defend the Quran's doctrine of tawhid:

Is the Trinity a Logical Contradiction?–Ron Rhodes

The most fundamental objection to the Trinity is that it violates the law of non-contradiction, which affirms that God cannot be both one and three at the same time. But this is a misunderstanding of this basic principle of logic. According to the law of non-contradiction, two propositions are contradictory if they both affirm and deny the same thing, at the same time, and in the same sense or in the same relationship. The doctrine of the Trinity, however, does not affirm that God is both one and three in the same sense or relationship. Rather, it affirms that God is one and only one in His essence, but He is three in His persons. Therefore, the Trinity is not contradictory. Person and essence are different. Person reveals who He is, and essence refers to what He is. So the Trinity does not refer to three whos in one who (which would be a contradiction), but three whos in one what (which is not a contradiction). So even though the Trinity is a mystery that goes beyond reason, it is not a contradiction that goes against reason. To comprehend how three persons can exist in one nature is beyond our finite ability, but to apprehend the non-contradictory nature of both premises is not beyond our finite ability. Pearl of Wisdom: The doctrine of the Trinity may be beyond reason, but it is not against reason. (Ron Rhodes, 5-Minute Apologetics for Today, p. 139, Harvest House Publishers, 2010)

By the way, this book is a great resource for the apologist who is on the move.
Blessing,
Lane
existenceofgod.org
 

[TheCross]

Depends on what you mean by co-equal. I currently hold that they are all ontologically equal but there is a sort of hierarchy between them. Such as a husband and wife are of the same ontological value but the husband is the 'head of the house.'

From my understanding if one is greater than the other the trinity can not work. As they are all co-equal.

Their roles differ, much like an employee and a CEO, both human beings but with different roles.

[DPMartin]

This might help on how or why.

Consider your existence, there is you, your presence in your flesh, and your word that is of you. Your word is of you, in your presence, otherwise it is not your word.
Gen:1:
(There is God) 1: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2: And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.  And (there is the Presence of God, now in His creation) the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

(And there is the Word of God spoken, or revealed in His Presence in His creation to His creation) 3: And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Like you, they are One, but separate in the view of others, of you. The world around you knows you buy your word in your presence in the world. Whether you keep your word, make good on your word, or not (for one esample).

What the Lord God actually did is give man His place in the earth. The reason why we are held accountable to our Creator and Judge, and the other creatures are not. Hence John’s explanation of the Word of God make flesh in his Gospel, and the last verse in Luke 3:38: Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

So the Father of that which a Son of, is of, in the very same Presence (Holy Spirit). Jesus said that God is a Spirit therefore the Presence of God is His Spirit, just as your presence in the earth is your flesh. Also note that the Presence of God is God and the Word of God is God and God being the Father (source) of His Word is God. What ever God speaks will be done, therefore God. Same with His Presence.

[Natus Regis]

There is no contradiction in the doctrine of the Trinity. Let us look at the two main propositions (and if I recall correctly, Robert in this thread also affirms this):

a       God is one (monotheism)
b       God is tri-personal

Where is the contradiction? I do not see any contradiction concerning the propositions a and b. There is no direct contradiction (e.g., (a & not-a), or (b &  not-b), or anything of that sort). I also do not see how one would imply falsehood of the other. The doctrine is that there basically exists one God consisting of three persons, and they are all divine, and we do not affirm that God exists as one and as three in the same sense.

It is by, the way, easy to think towards tritheism (three gods) or modalism (that one God revealed himself at different times with different modes, opposing the standard trinitarian doctrine). Both of these are normally rejected and not Christian doctrine.

[jayceeii]

The doctrine is that there basically exists one God consisting of three persons, and they are all divine, and we do not affirm that God exists as one and as three in the same sense.

One thing missing in Christianity is an idea God could project a multifarious nature, although to do real deeds in different places such a projection is required. We have an example in human hands, that can be doing different things while operated by one person. It’s always baffled me, for instance, how pianists can accomplish something so radically different with each hand, to generate beautiful music. In God’s case then we can muse the Incarnation represents the best parts of God’s Personality, insofar as these can be encapsulated in the human frame. Nonetheless this is a tiny aspect of God’s total potency.