Laudate_Dominum Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 From my point of view logic is illogical!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqSlaMME-Mk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted September 4, 2015 Author Share Posted September 4, 2015 so far all i see is people posting theories of logical trinity, only to get their ideas smacked down as heresy. others say it's beyond our understanding or a mystery. it seems that is just another way of saying 'it might sound illogical but..'. i could concede that maybe there's something we dont understand, maybe other dimensions beyond our grasp or something. but as it sits, if we're concluding what everyone here is, it seems we should at least be able to admit the trinity SOUNDS illogical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 so far all i see is people posting theories of logical trinity, only to get their ideas smacked down as heresy. others say it's beyond our understanding or a mystery. it seems that is just another way of saying 'it might sound illogical but..'. i could concede that maybe there's something we dont understand, maybe other dimensions beyond our grasp or something. but as it sits, if we're concluding what everyone here is, it seems we should at least be able to admit the trinity SOUNDS illogical. Before this topic goes any further - it might help if you set forth a proposed definition of "logical" and "illogical". Let's assume for the sake of argument that the Christian concept of the Trinity is objectively true. Can something that is objectively true be illogical - in your opinion? I am not sure if I would go as far as to call the Trinity entirely illogical - there have been plenty of things in history that we have not understood, but then at a later time came to understand. The fact that we did not understand it in the past does not mean that it was illogical then. Every being that we know of in the universe consists of one person. The Trinity asserts that there is a being that consists of three persons. There is no being like that in the known universe - so it is difficult for us to fathom, certainly. Perhaps one day God will show us how that works. Thread hijack - Question for people that know (a.k.a. not reyb): Technically, I think that the Catholic Church teaches that God is not a "being" in any sense at all, but rather "the sheer act of to be itself" as Fr. Barron puts it: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column/why-i-love-my-invisible-friend-2970/ Is Fr. Barron using the word "being" there in the same sense that people sometimes say "One being" when attempting to explain the Trinity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reyb Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) Ouch. That really hurts reyb. Especially considering how much I and other people on this forum value your opinion. Since you have quoted Colossians in support of your nonsense - how do you know that Paul wrote Colossians? How do you know that a person named Paul existed, and how do you know that Colossians is true and not just a nice fictional story that Paul decided to create one day? Is that something that the Metatron told you during your self-professed out-of-body experience when you saw Jesus and saw your body on fire like a burning bush? Did the Metatron introduce you to Paul and provide you with an original draft of his letter to inspect? Let's assume for the sake of argument that the Christian concept of the Trinity is objectively true. Can something that is objectively true be illogical - in your opinion? I quoted Apostle Paul’s Colossians to show you that Christ is the mystery of God. And I did it since I know that you accepted Colossian as a sacred letter. It is written so to speak and thus, I do not need any further explanation. But it seems, it is not enough for you. Okay, let us suppose that a man named Paul did not really exist in this world. But one thing you can never dismissed, and that is, this kind of letter exists. There is also a possibility that it was intentionally or unintentionally altered, modified, shortened or expanded to suit someone else belief but still, its message is enough confirmation on my part that the writer of this letter is a true witness of God. Why? Because, what I saw was confirmed in it. This is the reason why said ‘only a witness can understand another witness’ especially when we will discuss about the real Jesus Christ. As I have said (and many times in this forum), no one in this world can make him known since God alone can reveal his Christ. Metatron, man of lawlessness, burning bush, Jonah and his big fish…etc are all different presentation made by different witnesses to just one thing – the Coming of the Son of Man. Even the writer of Luke said the same thing in the beginning of his story. (Luke 1:1-4). Luke 1:1-4 Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed. NKJV Regarding Holy Trinity: You started in a wrong premise since you already accepted and considered that the Trinity is objectively true. Of course, if Trinity is objectively true then it must be logical since logic is just a tool in analyzing arguments whether it is true or false. But, if you really wanted to know if this trinity is objectively true then, you must do it the other way around. You must try to analyze all arguments concerning this Trinity, and if you see many self-contradictory proposition then something is really wrong. Why? Because, how can it be logical if there are many inconsistencies? Trinity is an erroneous proposition on the nature of God. It is a lie. It is a deception since it will not teach you to seek the real Jesus Christ. I already explained it in this forum. Edited September 5, 2015 by reyb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AccountDeleted Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 I quoted Apostle Paul’s Colossians to show you that Christ is the mystery of God. And I did it since I know that you accepted Colossian as a sacred letter. It is written so to speak and thus, I do not need any further explanation. But it seems, it is not enough for you. Okay, let us suppose that a man named Paul did not really exist in this world. But one thing you can never dismissed, and that is, this kind of letter exists. There is also a possibility that it was intentionally or unintentionally altered, modified, shortened or expanded to suit someone else belief but still, its message is enough confirmation on my part that the writer of this letter is a true witness of God. Why? Because, what I saw was confirmed in it. This is the reason why said ‘only a witness can understand another witness’ especially when we will discuss about the real Jesus Christ. As I have said (and many times in this forum), no one in this world can make him known since God alone can reveal his Christ. Metatron, man of lawlessness, burning bush, Jonah and his big fish…etc are all different presentation made by different witnesses to just one thing – the Coming of the Son of Man. Even the writer of Luke said the same thing in the beginning of his story. (Luke 1:1-4). Luke 1:1-4 Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed. NKJV Regarding Holy Trinity: You started in a wrong premise since you already accepted and considered that the Trinity is objectively true. Of course, if Trinity is objectively true then it must be logical since logic is just a tool in analyzing arguments whether it is true or false. But, if you really wanted to know if this trinity is objectively true then, you must do it the other way around. You must try to analyze all arguments concerning this Trinity, and if you see many self-contradictory proposition then something is really wrong. Why? Because, how can it be logical if there are many inconsistencies? Trinity is an erroneous proposition on the nature of God. It is a lie. It is a deception since it will not teach you to seek the real Jesus Christ. I already explained it in this forum. So since you appear to be very satisfied with your own religion, why come to a Catholic forum to debate an issue that Catholics are never going to change because the Trinity is an integral part of our faith and beliefs and doctrine? You just like debating? Or perhaps are you a little in doubt of the things that you have been posting and are hoping that someone here can convince you to believe in the Trinity? It really is unrealistic to think that you are going to find anyone converting to your point of view here. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) I quoted Apostle Paul’s Colossians to show you that Christ is the mystery of God. And I did it since I know that you accepted Colossian as a sacred letter. It is written so to speak and thus, I do not need any further explanation. But it seems, it is not enough for you. No. You cannot use Paul while rejecting all other books of the Bible. If you reject the authority of the Catholic Church to declare what is Sacred Scripture - then you must provide an independent basis for relying on the letters of Paul. You cannot selectively appeal to the Church authority. And it appears that your only basis for using the letters of Paul is that "you saw the Real Jesus when you left your body and proceeded to watch it on flame like a burning bush." That is ridiculous. And there is no reason why I or anyone else here should accept it. Please stop wasting your time and our time. Okay, let us suppose that a man named Paul did not really exist in this world. But one thing you can never dismissed, and that is, this kind of letter exists. There is also a possibility that it was intentionally or unintentionally altered, modified, shortened or expanded to suit someone else belief but still, its message is enough confirmation on my part that the writer of this letter is a true witness of God. Why? Because, what I saw was confirmed in it. This is the reason why said ‘only a witness can understand another witness’ especially when we will discuss about the real Jesus Christ. As I have said (and many times in this forum), no one in this world can make him known since God alone can reveal his Christ. OK - so you can offer us no proof for your beleifs other than the alleged vision that you saw. You expect us to apply logic to determine whether our own beliefs are true yet you appear to be perfectly fine with basing your own beliefs on a vision. How do you know that this vision of yours was not a drug-induced hallucination or the result of a mental-illness? How do you know that this vision of yours was not a trick that Satan played on you? Have you gone to see a psychiatrist and taken tests to determine whether you have a mental-illness? Again - you are wasting your time and you are wasting the time of everyone on this forum. Metatron, man of lawlessness, burning bush, Jonah and his big fish…etc are all different presentation made by different witnesses to just one thing – the Coming of the Son of Man. Even the writer of Luke said the same thing in the beginning of his story. (Luke 1:1-4). Luke 1:1-4 Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed. NKJV Your interpretation of these verses is ridiculous. It does not say anything about a Metatron, man of lawlessness, Jonah and his Big Fish, the Coming of the Son of Man. The only proof that you can offer for your interpretation is that "you saw the Real Jesus when you left your body and proceeded to watch it on flame like a burning bush". It would be ridiculous for anyone here to accept that so again - you are wasting your time and your are wasting our time. Prove to us that what you saw was not a drug-induced hallucination and then perhaps we can talk. But, if you really wanted to know if this trinity is objectively true then, you must do it the other way around. You must try to analyze all arguments concerning this Trinity, and if you see many self-contradictory proposition then something is really wrong. Why? Because, how can it be logical if there are many inconsistencies? That's nice. Except that the only justification or proof that you have for anything that you write is a hallucination. There is much more logical evidence to support the assertion that what the Catholic Church teaches is true than there is for anything that you have written here on the forum. Trinity is an erroneous proposition on the nature of God. It is a lie. It is a deception since it will not teach you to seek the real Jesus Christ. I already explained it in this forum. It may be the truth or it may be a lie. But there is much more evidence for me to beleive that what the Catholic Churche teaches is true than there is for me to beleive the delusional hallucinations of a person on the internet. Everyone on this forum knows very well that you do not accept our beliefs and your reasons for not beleiving them. You have made your arugments and you have no futher proof to offer except that you "saw a vision of the real Jesus". Again - there is no reason for anyone here to accept that. And not a single person on this forum has found you persuasive in the many years that you have been here. The rejection of your arguments has not and will not change, yet you keep repeating the same things over and over and over and over. That is a sign of mental instability. Please see a doctor. And you are doing nothing here other than constantly attacking Catholics. That makes you a troll. Edited September 5, 2015 by Peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reyb Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 So since you appear to be very satisfied with your own religion, why come to a Catholic forum to debate an issue that Catholics are never going to change because the Trinity is an integral part of our faith and beliefs and doctrine? You just like debating? Or perhaps are you a little in doubt of the things that you have been posting and are hoping that someone here can convince you to believe in the Trinity? It really is unrealistic to think that you are going to find anyone converting to your point of view here. Just saying. No. You cannot use Paul while rejecting all other books of the Bible. If you reject the authority of the Catholic Church to declare what is Sacred Scripture - then you must provide an independent basis for relying on the letters of Paul. You cannot selectively appeal to the Church authority. And it appears that your only basis for using the letters of Paul is that "you saw the Real Jesus when you left your body and proceeded to watch it on flame like a burning bush." That is ridiculous. And there is no reason why I or anyone else here should accept it. Please stop wasting your time and our time. OK - so you can offer us no proof for your beleifs other than the alleged vision that you saw. You expect us to apply logic to determine whether our own beliefs are true yet you appear to be perfectly fine with basing your own beliefs on a vision. How do you know that this vision of yours was not a drug-induced hallucination or the result of a mental-illness? How do you know that this vision of yours was not a trick that Satan played on you? Have you gone to see a psychiatrist and taken tests to determine whether you have a mental-illness? Again - you are wasting your time and you are wasting the time of everyone on this forum. Your interpretation of these verses is ridiculous. It does not say anything about a Metatron, man of lawlessness, Jonah and his Big Fish, the Coming of the Son of Man. The only proof that you can offer for your interpretation is that "you saw the Real Jesus when you left your body and proceeded to watch it on flame like a burning bush". It would be ridiculous for anyone here to accept that so again - you are wasting your time and your are wasting our time. Prove to us that what you saw was not a drug-induced hallucination and then perhaps we can talk. That's nice. Except that the only justification or proof that you have for anything that you write is a hallucination. There is much more logical evidence to support the assertion that what the Catholic Church teaches is true than there is for anything that you have written here on the forum. It may be the truth or it may be a lie. But there is much more evidence for me to beleive that what the Catholic Churche teaches is true than there is for me to beleive the delusional hallucinations of a person on the internet. Everyone on this forum knows very well that you do not accept our beliefs and your reasons for not beleiving them. You have made your arugments and you have no futher proof to offer except that you "saw a vision of the real Jesus". Again - there is no reason for anyone here to accept that. And not a single person on this forum has found you persuasive in the many years that you have been here. The rejection of your arguments has not and will not change, yet you keep repeating the same things over and over and over and over. That is a sign of mental instability. Please see a doctor. And you are doing nothing here other than constantly attacking Catholics. That makes you a troll. What can I do? Actually, it is really very tempting on my part to ignore everything and for almost 18 years, I always complaining and saying, why I need to do something which will make them hated me? I know, I will be insulted, reprimanded, tagged as evil gossiper, an enemy of many honest, moralist and religious people, a self-centered conceited nonsense creature....etc. But still, I am doing it because, I love you as I love myself although this kind of love is not really innate from me. I am not lying. I truly believe in your good intention in honouring and serving God but, unfortunately you are not aware that you are doing the opposite, and thus, you must be informed. I do not come here to put a fight as if I am trying to prove anything for myself or to convert anyone just like other preachers are doing. Actually I am not even a preacher in any religious organization. But, you must realize that you are in error so that you will seek the real Jesus Christ. As long as you have this day, which we called ‘Today’, I truly believe that you can still see him. But, if you close your eyes before this ‘Today’ ends then, we can do nothing at all. The beginning and the end meets and it will grind you forever. I am very sure. If you are in my place and I am in yours. You will definitely do for me what I am doing now because, you loved me too as you loved yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 What can I do? Actually, it is really very tempting on my part to ignore everything and for almost 18 years, I always complaining and saying, why I need to do something which will make them hated me? I know, I will be insulted, reprimanded, tagged as evil gossiper, an enemy of many honest, moralist and religious people, a self-centered conceited nonsense creature....etc. But still, I am doing it because, I love you as I love myself although this kind of love is not really innate from me. I am not lying. I truly believe in your good intention in honouring and serving God but, unfortunately you are not aware that you are doing the opposite, and thus, you must be informed. I do not come here to put a fight as if I am trying to prove anything for myself or to convert anyone just like other preachers are doing. Actually I am not even a preacher in any religious organization. But, you must realize that you are in error so that you will seek the real Jesus Christ. As long as you have this day, which we called ‘Today’, I truly believe that you can still see him. But, if you close your eyes before this ‘Today’ ends then, we can do nothing at all. The beginning and the end meets and it will grind you forever. I am very sure. If you are in my place and I am in yours. You will definitely do for me what I am doing now because, you loved me too as you loved yourself. I do see Jesus Christ - at Mass. Nothing that you write here is going to change that belief. So you are wasting your time. If you are truly concerend about convincing people to "seek the real Jesus" and not the "Historical Jesus" then I suggest that you go about it another way. What you have done here has obviously had absolutely no effect on anyone other than to annoy - so why not try a different approach? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reyb Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) I do see Jesus Christ - at Mass. Nothing that you write here is going to change that belief. So you are wasting your time. If you are truly concerend about convincing people to "seek the real Jesus" and not the "Historical Jesus" then I suggest that you go about it another way. What you have done here has obviously had absolutely no effect on anyone other than to annoy - so why not try a different approach? Okay. It is up to you. I have done my part. Edited September 5, 2015 by reyb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 And by the insulting and overbearing nature in which you approach other members of this forum - there is no reason for me to believe in your professions of love or that you know Jesus. You seem to like Paul. Paul writes: 4 Love is patient and kind; love is not jealous or boastful; 5 it is not arrogant or rude. Love does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; 6 it does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right. 7 Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. But I do not see any of those things in you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reyb Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) Double Post. Edited September 5, 2015 by reyb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reyb Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 And by the insulting and overbearing nature in which you approach other members of this forum - there is no reason for me to believe in your professions of love or that you know Jesus. You seem to like Paul. Paul writes: But I do not see any of those things in you. Did I insulted you? Anyway, as I have said...it is now up to you. I have done my part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted September 6, 2015 Author Share Posted September 6, 2015 (edited) Before this topic goes any further - it might help if you set forth a proposed definition of "logical" and "illogical". Let's assume for the sake of argument that the Christian concept of the Trinity is objectively true. Can something that is objectively true be illogical - in your opinion? I am not sure if I would go as far as to call the Trinity entirely illogical - there have been plenty of things in history that we have not understood, but then at a later time came to understand. The fact that we did not understand it in the past does not mean that it was illogical then. Every being that we know of in the universe consists of one person. The Trinity asserts that there is a being that consists of three persons. There is no being like that in the known universe - so it is difficult for us to fathom, certainly. Perhaps one day God will show us how that works. Thread hijack - Question for people that know (a.k.a. not reyb): Technically, I think that the Catholic Church teaches that God is not a "being" in any sense at all, but rather "the sheer act of to be itself" as Fr. Barron puts it: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column/why-i-love-my-invisible-friend-2970/ Is Fr. Barron using the word "being" there in the same sense that people sometimes say "One being" when attempting to explain the Trinity? i dont see a reason to define logical or illogical. but if i did define them, any dictionary defintion will do. i dont know if something objectively true can be illogical. my thought process on this is i was one who believed in the trinity as illogical. and in the vein of not placing restrictions on god said he can be illogical. then i started to question whether God can be illogical, and that brought up the old idea of the trinity and brought it into question to me. i tend to still believe in the trinity but think that idea has some splaining to do. and perhaps what is thought of as heretical modal ideas shouldn't be considered heresy. i agree with you though, maybe it just seems illogical but time will show us something different as many things have come to later be fully understood that once weren't. but i still stand by my statements, that if we're concluding what everyone here is concluding, it seems we should at least admit that it SOUNDS illogical. Edited September 6, 2015 by dairygirl4u2c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 . . . but i still stand by my statements, that if we're concluding what everyone here is concluding, it seems we should at least admit that it SOUNDS illogical. I don't see why anyone should agree with your conclusion when you will not define what you mean by "illogical" or what criteria you are using to classify things as logical or illogical. There are many different dictionaries that contain different definitions. Which one are you using? Define your terms and your criteria and then I will tell you whether or not I agree with your statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didacus Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 But this is a question of things difficult to understand, but easily accepted once understood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now