Apply PHILOSOPHY to the argument of the TRINITY

by Terry 76 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Terry
    Terry

    The TRINITY doctrine is a conceptual classification. It is not a thing itself. We don't bump into a Trinity in everyday life. We don't eat the Trinity or sniff it or touch it or hear it or see it.

    The TRINITY is an abstraction from other ideas into a way of thinking about something we can't perceive except through awkward argument.

    To apply philosophy to the argument of the TRINITY we follow a logical process as follows....

    1. Things which are said to exist can be said to have similarity and differences to other things which exist. Otherwise, we could not actually distinguish one of anything from another such thing.

    (The "bird" is not the "dog" because of characteristics which differ essentially). We don't have to examine each and every specific bird in the world and every specific dog to "know" they are unalike ESSENTIALLY.

    2. When we successfully find differences, those differences themselves are what distinguish and identify one thing from another. But, the differences must be ESSENTIAL. (Example: the height and weight of a bird or dog is not the ESSENTIAL identifying element. You'd never say, for example, "This can't be a bird, it weighs three pounds!")

    Clear so far?

    Take a jar full of pennies. They all look alike don't they? How would you distinguish one penny from another penny? Not by color or shape, surely. It would not be by similarity. It would be by difference! The date on the penny, for example. How would you further distinguish one 1947 penny from another 1947 penny? Look for further differences in wear, lightness or darkness of tarnish, location, etc.

    You get it. Let's not be tedious about this.

    Here is our first RULE OF THUMB philosophically about CONCEPTS:

    1.When determining CONCEPTUAL classifications you cannot ignore essential similarities nor essential differences. You cannot omit them. You cannot arbitrarily sub-divide them. (Tall birds and short dogs)

    Why?

    The method to obliterate VALID CONCEPTS is to identify them by NON-ESSENTIALS and thus create ANTI-CONCEPTS.

    Stop and think about that for a moment. We destroy our ability to use concepts when we destroy them by using NON-essentials instead of essentials as identifying elements!

    What is a CONCEPT?

    A concept is an accurate way of identifying things which are alike in ESSENTIAL ways without having to worry about particualr measurments.

    A "chair" is a concept. All chairs have identifying characteristics. Color is a NON-ESSENTIAL. Material is a NON-ESSENTIAL.

    (You'd never say, "That can't be a chair because it is black.")

    We think about the CHAIR-ness without having to take the time to think about every single variation of chair SPECIFICALLY in the whole world!

    A CONCEPT is a very useful short-hand method of encompassing an infinite range of knowledge.

    We can destroy the usefulness of a CONCEPT by exerting a NON-ESSENTIAL as standard of identifying it.

    At this point it is necessary to establish something for your consideration.

    Why do we use concepts for thinking?

    Take the word CROWD. We can talk about a large group of people without having to name them individually! We don't have to try and count the large group specifically! We don't have to interview them as to what they are thinking!

    We can go on with our business without bogging down in non-essential details!

    An ALGEBRAIC symbol functions similarly.

    An ALGEBRAIC symbol may exist in ANY quantity as s long as it exists in SOME quantity which is equal to the other side of the =

    Perceptual awareness is a KIND OF ARITHMETIC.

    Conceptual awareness is a kind of algebra of cognition.

    Concepts are not objective (neither revealed nor invented). (You cannot point to CHAIR. You are forced to point to A SPECIFIC CHAIR).

    Concepts are produced by man's consciousness in accordance with facts of reality as a short-cut means of INTEGRATING data without bogging down in inconsequential details.

    Got that?

    Concepts enable us to to THINK!

    Concepts are not for COMMUNICATION,primarily. They are for THINKING primarily.

    The pre-condition of communication is that you have something ABOUT WHICH you are communicating!

    A CONCEPT enables humans to classify and organize knowledge on an UNlimited scale so that man may actually THINK productively.

    All of man's actual knowledge about reality rests on this fact: the open-ended nature of concepts allows the yet-to-be-discovered characteristics of a group to be added as definitions.

    Without concepts, man may only deal with what is in front of him at the immediate moment!

    So....having established the above...we move on to the CONCEPT of the TRINITY.

    1.Concepts aren't formed in a vacuum. Concepts are formed in a CONTEXT.

    2.To conceptualize anything you must first observe similarities and differences and distinguish the ESSENTIAL similarity which all members of the CONCEPT share.

    3.Concepts are fact-driven and not subjective and personal concoctions.

    4.The essential nature of a thing is what gives evidence that IT exists as unique rather than indistinguishable from OTHER things.

    WHAT PART OF THE CONCEPT OF THE TRINITY IS THE ESSENTIAL?

    The 3-ness of God?

    The 1-ness of God?

    How does being a "member" of the Trinity not invalidate the 1-ness?

    How does the Supreme-ness of the Being not invalidate the 3-ness?

    You may begin your questions at this point.

  • VoidEater
    VoidEater

    Let's not be tedious about this.

    Too late... ;-)

    Concepts are fact-driven and not subjective and personal concoctions.

    Nope, concepts are individualistic until you define them through consensus. Until you agree about what "chairness" is, a "chair" can be as vague or as specific as the individual determines it to be. Through communication, you define concepts ad hoc. In some contexts, "chair" may be limited to "dining room chair made of wood", or may be broad enough to be "anything you can sit upon including immovable boulders in the ground". It depends on definition, which is variable. There is no absolute "chairness" you can point to - only a general consensus of what "chairness" usually is, or a specific definition to be determined.

    The essential nature of a thing is what gives evidence that IT exists as unique rather than indistinguishable from OTHER things.

    Some "philosophies" say the "essence" of a thing is it's invisible spiritual nature, which we perceive as it manifests to our senses.

    You may begin your questions at this point.

    Are you a mind or a body? Do you think or do you feel? Does one invalidate the other?

  • glenster
  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    The TRINITY is an abstraction from other ideas into a way of thinking about something we can't perceive except through awkward argument.

    The Trinity is a conceptualization of something that is beyond all human understanding. As such, it is an imperfect conceptualization. As such, the Trinity, as it truly is, is a mystery.

    You may begin your questions at this point.

    What are you giving lessons here? Hubris!

    BTS

  • Rapunzel
    Rapunzel

    Terry - You are obviously a very intelligent person who expresses himself with astonishing clarity.

    Having said that, I must respectfully inquire as to what point there might be in applying philosophy to the concept of the Trinity. It's like applying philosophy to the concept of God because, after all, for many people the concept of "God" and the concept of the "Trinity" are one in the same; for many people, the Christian concept of God is the Trinity, and the Trinity is the Christian concept of God.

    In my mind, it is pointless to apply philosophy to the concept of the Trinity, as it is pointless to apply philosophy to the concept of God.

    However, it may well be possible to apply philosophy to the concept of religion because, whereas there is absolutely no proof for the existrence of God, there can be no denying the existence of religion. I believe that it is possible to apply philosophy to the historical conception of the Trinity. One could approach the concept in its diachronic aspect [its development throughout history]. One could study its origins, its possibly pre-Christian origins. One could study the resistance with which the doctrine was met, for example among Moslems and Jews. One can also study how the Trinity doctrine was rejected by various groups within the Christian churches.

  • journey-on
    journey-on

    I'm with VoidEater on this one: "Concepts are individualistic until you define them through concensus."

    Every individual brain is constantly forming new categorical concepts for his/her personal perception only that would not

    make sense to an outsider.

    Some "philosophies" say the "essence" of a thing is it's invisible spiritual nature, which we perceive as it manifests to our senses.

    This above statement is what I mean the other day, Terry, about the scent of a flower transcending smell only and interacting in the

    spiritual "realm" then being given back to us on a deeper level. It's essence (it's nature) is what is used in aromatherapy. That is why synthetic

    fragrances do not have the same effect as the real deal.

    You may begin your questions at this point.

    I have never believed God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are three but separate individuals. However, for the sake of argument with what

    you have laid out in your topic:

    WHAT PART OF THE CONCEPT OF THE TRINITY IS THE ESSENTIAL?

    Essential to the trinity is that there be three separate individual operators that each have their own identity, but when combined make one.

    My brain categorizes this or conceptualizes this as Power Source, Hardware, Software. Each stand alone in identity, but when put together make up the one thing we call Computer.

    In the spiritual matter of the Trinity, I conceptualize it as the Creator, Creation, Action (Creating) = Cosmos

    Another "trinity" in my categorizing mind: Space, Matter, Motion = Time

    Another: Egg/Ovum, Sperm, Fertilization = Life

    Neither invalidates the oneness nor the threeness.

  • journey-on
    journey-on

    Also, if I may add a thought to my above post.

    On a deeper level, it seems to me that the concept of the Trinity is more metaphysical than religious.

    It seems to require a Positive or Active Nature, a Negative or Receptive Nature, and finally the actual Action or Interaction between the two to produce a new One.

  • Rapunzel
    Rapunzel

    BTS - I think that Terry may have been employing irony with his statement that we may begin our questions at this point. "Hubris" is a rather strong word, don't you think?

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips

    From the Athanasian Creed, it conceptualized it very well:

    And the Catholic Faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity
    in Unity,
    neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance.
    For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son,
    and another of the Holy Ghost.
    But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one,
    the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal.
    Such as the Father is, such is the Son,
    and such is the Holy Ghost.
    The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate,
    and the Holy Ghost uncreate.
    The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible,
    and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible.
    The Father eternal, the Son eternal,
    and the Holy Ghost eternal.
    And yet they are not three eternals,
    but one eternal.
    As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated,
    but one uncreated, and one incomprehensible.
    So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty,
    and the Holy Ghost Almighty.
    And yet they are not three Almighties,
    but one Almighty.
    So the Father is God, the Son is God,
    and the Holy Ghost is God.
    And yet they are not three Gods,
    but one God.
    So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord,
    and the Holy Ghost Lord.
    And yet not three Lords,
    but one Lord.
    For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge ever y
    Person by Himself to be both God and Lord,
    so we are forbidden by the Catholic Religion, to say, there be three Gods,
    or three Lords.
    The Father is made of none,
    neither created, nor begotten.
    The Son is of the Father alone,
    not made, nor created, but begotten.
    The Holy Ghost is of the Father [and of the Son],
    neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
    So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons;
    one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts.
    And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other; none is greater, or l ess
    than another;
    but the whole three Persons are co-eternal together and co-equal.
    So that in all things, as is aforesaid,
    the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.

  • trevor
    trevor

    The trinity is a very limited view of god or gods. There are hundreds gods and many concepts of what god or gods actually mean or represent.

    The Christian trinity is just another closed shop interpetation of a the concept of god or gods. What it means to be a Christian is as fiercely debated as what it means to be an Atheist.

    A philosopher is free to pontificate on the subject of gods to infinitum because the number of gods one can believe in is only limited by one's imagination and the desire to believe.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit