is there any logical evidence that can prove the trinity ?

[Maxximiliann]

As I'm sure you're aware, Luke 1:36 states that Mary and Elizabeth are cousins and that John is six months older than Jesus, making John and Jesus second cousins. Luke 3:23 also informs us that John baptized Jesus when this one was about 30 years old, said baptism found recorded in Luke 3:21, 22.

Considering all these historical facts from the lens of your claims we have to ask:
 

[1] John is God's second cousin who is six months older than Him?
[2] Why did God need to be baptized?
[3] John saw God come down in the form of a bird and sit down on top of God's head?
[4] Both John and God heard God saying to God, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased?

So, I don't understand the issue here.


If you understand "personhood" as an extension of rational nature(=something with a mind), then there's absolutely no issue. The person is not a distinct ontological entity from the mind. That is:

- when you have mind + person, you don't have 1 + 1. Rather, you have 1 and its relational extension.


The "I" of the mind is not a seperate ontological entity of the mind. As if you have one thing - the mind; plus another thing - the person. No, you have the mind and the person of that mind.


So, the issue here is your misunderstanding of personhood and what it is construed as within classical theism. I mean, even secular pscyhology would tell you that. The "I" of the mind is not a distinct entity from the mind. It is an extension of the mind. The operating system of the mind, so to speak.


Thus, it is perfectly coherent:

- the First Divine Person calls the Second Divine Person - God

Because both of Them abide in the same Divine Mind, thus both are God. Both of Them come from the Divine Essence, but are Two different Divine Persons.

Just like human beings have one human nature and many persons. You, me, William Lane Craig, Saint Augustine and so forth. However, there's only one human nature. And just like it does make sense for me to call you "man", and you call me "man", so does it make sense for One Divine Person to call another God, and vice-versa.

Thank you for sharing that

Now, as I'm sure you're aware, Luke 1:36 states that Mary and Elizabeth are cousins and that John is six months older than Jesus, making John and Jesus second cousins. Luke 3:23 also informs us that John baptized Jesus when this one was about 30 years old, said baptism found recorded in Luke 3:21, 22.

Considering all these historical facts from the lens of your claims we have to ask:
 

[1] John is God's second cousin who is six months older than Him?
[2] Why did God need to be baptized?
[3] John saw God come down in the form of a bird and sit down on top of God's head?
[4] Both John and God heard God saying to God, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased?

[Maxximiliann]

"The hegemony of one caste over all kinds of social spheres — from media, legislature, bureaucracy, judiciary to academia and civil societies — is the reality of India and one cannot deny it. And so is the fact that caste violence is directly proportional to gender violence." - https://www.news18.com/news/buzz/outrage-over-jack-dorsey-holding-smash-brahmanical-patriarchy-poster-shows-casteist-souls-cant-face-reality-1945061.html

How can you support such evil?

[jayceeii]

"The hegemony of one caste over all kinds of social spheres — from media, legislature, bureaucracy, judiciary to academia and civil societies — is the reality of India and one cannot deny it. And so is the fact that caste violence is directly proportional to gender violence." - https://www.news18.com/news/buzz/outrage-over-jack-dorsey-holding-smash-brahmanical-patriarchy-poster-shows-casteist-souls-cant-face-reality-1945061.html

How can you support such evil?

Your argument appears to be, “Anyone who sees the remotest good in Hinduism must be an avid supporter of the caste system.” This is a crude argument of the mud slinging variety, picking up mud around and hurling it indiscriminately in the hopes of doing damage. When such arguments succeed it is because those who read the argument are allied in prejudice with the assailant, when the argument itself is utterly bereft of merit.

The truth is there is a hefty proportion of actual Hindus, who unlike myself picking out a truth here or there, are full believers in all its tenets, that decry the caste system as evil. Gandhi was perhaps their most prominent representative, known the world over for his efforts to rid India of this system. Yet more importantly, your argument appears to spring from raw hatred of the Hindus, thus becoming an example of a similar intent to oppress.

[Maxximiliann]

"The hegemony of one caste over all kinds of social spheres — from media, legislature, bureaucracy, judiciary to academia and civil societies — is the reality of India and one cannot deny it. And so is the fact that caste violence is directly proportional to gender violence." - https://www.news18.com/news/buzz/outrage-over-jack-dorsey-holding-smash-brahmanical-patriarchy-poster-shows-casteist-souls-cant-face-reality-1945061.html

How can you support such evil?

Your argument appears to be, “Anyone who sees the remotest good in Hinduism must be an avid supporter of the caste system.” This is a crude argument of the mud slinging variety, picking up mud around and hurling it indiscriminately in the hopes of doing damage. When such arguments succeed it is because those who read the argument are allied in prejudice with the assailant, when the argument itself is utterly bereft of merit.

The truth is there is a hefty proportion of actual Hindus, who unlike myself picking out a truth here or there, are full believers in all its tenets, that decry the caste system as evil. Gandhi was perhaps their most prominent representative, known the world over for his efforts to rid India of this system. Yet more importantly, your argument appears to spring from raw hatred of the Hindus, thus becoming an example of a similar intent to oppress.

Why on earth would you think anyone desires to have their life look anything like the desperate lives of Hindus today in India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia, Sri Lanka or Nepal?

"What you do screams so hard no one can hear what you say. " -Anonymous

 Hinduism defames itself.  Your opinions are insignificant; you're fighting a lost battle . . . 

[jayceeii]

Why on earth would you think anyone desires to have their life look anything like the desperate lives of Hindus today in India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia, Sri Lanka or Nepal?

"What you do screams so hard no one can hear what you say. " -Anonymous

 Hinduism defames itself.  Your opinions are insignificant; you're fighting a lost battle . . .

There are over a billion Hindus, and just like in America some are rich and happy while others are poor and miserable. There is good food and clean water for the Hindu elite, and if they have a greater concentration of the poor this seems to be similar to Mexico, where are many poor Christians though the United States has done marginally better. I’m not fighting for Hinduism, only noting aspects of the truth were revealed in different places.

My opinions may be insignificant today, but I’m building a certain case, you know. I’ve thought over the world’s issues rather thoroughly, so I won’t be taken aback by questions. And what I say depends on who is listening. I can have multiple messages, though preferring to tender one at a time. I’d prefer speaking honestly, not having to pretend I am something that I’m not. I’m sure you’d say the same in case anyone asked you a question.

[Maxximiliann]

Why on earth would you think anyone desires to have their life look anything like the desperate lives of Hindus today in India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia, Sri Lanka or Nepal?

"What you do screams so hard no one can hear what you say. " -Anonymous

 Hinduism defames itself.  Your opinions are insignificant; you're fighting a lost battle . . .

I’m not fighting for Hinduism

Then why are you Hindu?

[jayceeii]

Then why are you Hindu?

Hinduism is a cartoon religion. It has some truths, but by and large it is silly, like all the religions are silly. These are the greatest things men have, but God bestowed just silliness.

[Maxximiliann]

Then why are you Hindu?

Hinduism is a cartoon religion. It has some truths, but by and large it is silly, like all the religions are silly. These are the greatest things men have, but God bestowed just silliness.

You're not making any sense. How does any of this directly answer my simple, straightforward query?

[jayceeii]

Then why are you Hindu?

Hinduism is a cartoon religion. It has some truths, but by and large it is silly, like all the religions are silly. These are the greatest things men have, but God bestowed just silliness.

You're not making any sense. How does any of this directly answer my simple, straightforward query?

To put it in logical format, I subscribe to no religion. Hinduism is a religion. Therefore, I do not subscribe to Hinduism.

Now, would you try to answer some of my simple, straightforward queries?

1. You claimed that Jesus drew a “bright line” to show who pleases God and who does not, but when I asked you to point to this line, you cannot. Where is the “bright line”?

2. When you say you believe “Jesus is Lord,” does this mean you accept God can take on a body? Do you see that if He has this power, He could use it again, and probably would?

3. Have you understood I nullified your argument that Hindus dwell in abysmal poverty, by pointing to Christians who dwell in abysmal poverty, all across South America?

[Maxximiliann]

2. When you say you believe “Jesus is Lord,” does this mean you accept God can take on a body?

I already addressed this days ago.

[jayceeii]

2. When you say you believe “Jesus is Lord,” does this mean you accept God can take on a body?

I already addressed this question .

Well, don’t be shy, restate it! Or are you allowing me to presume you’re the first Christian in history who accepts that the Lord could embody again if He chose? They do not admit that God could exercise the same power that He used to appear as Jesus. In fact they don’t want it.

Questions Max Hasn’t Answered (or Read?)

1. You claimed that Jesus drew a “bright line” to show who pleases God and who does not, but when I asked you to point to this line, you cannot. Where is the “bright line”?

2. When you say you believe “Jesus is Lord,” does this mean you accept God can take on a body? Do you see that if He has this power, He could use it again, and probably would?

3. Have you understood I nullified your argument that Hindus dwell in abysmal poverty, by pointing to Christians who dwell in abysmal poverty, all across South America?

[Maxximiliann]

1. You claimed that Jesus drew a “bright line” to show who pleases God and who does not, but when I asked you to point to this line, you cannot. Where is the “bright line”?

I responded to this as well days ago. If you won't engage with my replies, why should I concern myself with yours?

[Maxximiliann]

To put it in logical format, I subscribe to no religion. Hinduism is a religion. Therefore, I do not subscribe to Hinduism.

So you're a Narcissist .  .  .  I get it .  .  .

[jayceeii]

1. You claimed that Jesus drew a “bright line” to show who pleases God and who does not, but when I asked you to point to this line, you cannot. Where is the “bright line”?

I responded to this as well days ago. If you won't engage with my replies, why should I concern myself with yours?

You said there was a “bright line,” but you did not say what it was! This becomes innuendo. This is like saying you went to chef’s school, then when someone asks you to show your diploma you reply, “I showed it to you days ago.” Real people didn’t see it.

Questions Max Hasn’t Answered (or Read?)

1. You claimed that Jesus drew a “bright line” to show who pleases God and who does not, but when I asked you to point to this line, you cannot. Where is the “bright line”?

2. When you say you believe “Jesus is Lord,” does this mean you accept God can take on a body? Do you see that if He has this power, He could use it again, and probably would?

3. Have you understood I nullified your argument that Hindus dwell in abysmal poverty, by pointing to Christians who dwell in abysmal poverty, all across South America?

[Maxximiliann]

3. Have you understood I nullified your argument that Hindus dwell in abysmal poverty, by pointing to Christians who dwell in abysmal poverty, all across South America?

Here, let me fix your Strawman-

"Have you understood I nullified your argument that Hindus dwell in abysmal poverty live desperate lives, by pointing to Christians who dwell in abysmal poverty, live desperate lives all across South America?"

Glad I could help