Is there a flaw in this argument for why the Trinity is incompatible with monotheism?

Is there a flaw in this argument for why the Trinity is incompatible with monotheism?

Since the Father and Son are both God they have 100% of the attributes of God. One attribute of God is being independent. If the Son is dependent on the Father then he is not God (because God is independent), but if the Son is independent of the Father then there's 2 independently existing beings both being God, meaning 2 Gods exist

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

  1. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's similar to "if the three of them are God, then why aren't there three Gods?". I also get this argument. Haven't found a solution, only sophistry like Gregory of Nyssa saying that you count one God because it's one essence, or because the three persons are doing the same action.

  2. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Modalism solves the Trinity.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Considered heretic

      No the Father and Son are the same being, just distinct persons. The Son has aseity ontologically in being but not in person, as he is eternally begotten by the Father

      >The Son has aseity ontologically in being but not in person
      Can it have aseity but not have it simultaneously?

      Why isn't an OMNIPOTENT being allowed to split Himself into individual avatars at will?

      >Why isn't an OMNIPOTENT being allowed to split Himself into individual avatars at will?
      Because it's contradictory like creating a rock he cannot carry

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        it cannot carry*

      • 7 months ago
        Ο Σολιταίρ

        God can create a rock he cannot carry, dingus.
        He is omnipotent.
        But he, at any moment can give himself power to carry it.
        God, in omnipotence, can limit and delimit himself however he wants.
        Have you ever been admin of a minecraft server?
        You can switch between survival and creative mode at will. Nothing can ever take away your ability to turn creative mode on. You have omnipotence

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          >But he, at any moment can give himself power to carry it.
          Can God permanently remove his omnipotence?

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            I guess, but why would he ever do that??
            There is no "gotcha" in saying that.

            >foolish questions avoid

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            So you agree there's something God can't do. He could create a stone he can't lift then permanently remove his omnipotence, so your minecraft creative mode objection doesn't work

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            God can limit himself but nothing outside of God can limit him.
            What is hard about this?
            Can God not determine (limit) his own behavior? Does God not have free will?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            God creates a very heavy stone
            God then permanently removes his omnipotence
            God cannot, and will never be able to lift this stone

            What part don't you understand?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            If God changed the limits it has, wouldn't it change, and, by changing, stop being God?

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            No. If I put on a weighted vest, and then took it off, would I stop being Solitaire?
            This is strange autism.
            God is comprehended as an omnipotent being with free will. Honestly ponder the implication of this.
            Do YOU limit and delimit yourself? Does that change who you are? Does your base "strength" or "power" change even if you limit yourself in some way?

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          What about the paradox generated? If it is able to create a rock it can't carry and does it, then it is not omnipotent.

          There is no argument. God is omnipotent. Saying God can't* do something (that is to say, he is limited by something outside himself) denies the omnipotent God.

          God creating a rock it cannot carry implies non-omnipotence

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            If I turn survival mode on... how can I turn creative mode back on?????
            hmmmm????
            Doesn't sound right to me. It's IMPOSSIBLE to turn creative mode on after turning survival mode on.
            God's omnipotence never goes away. He always can limit and delimit himself.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't know if minecraft cheats are analogous to the logics of God's omnipotence

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            a closer analogue than most

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            >God's omnipotence never goes away
            YOU'RE LIMITING GOD1!!1111!!!!!!

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            I've explained what I mean.
            Only God can limit himself. He maintains his omnipotence of his own free will. Which he will always do forever unceasingly.
            God can limit and delimit himself without losing his omnipotence.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            You haven't addressed the objection of God permanently removing his omnipotence. Either he can't do it, which is a limitation, or he can in which case other limitations arise

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            I've said he can do it.
            But he never will*. As in, he will never will it.
            There's an infinitude of things God can* do but never will* do.
            Not hard to understand.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            So you agree there's something God can't do.

            Now that we've established this, do you have another objection to the original argument?

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            >So you agree there's something God can't do

            what?
            what?
            are you determinist?
            do you not believe in free will?
            not even with God?
            just because you won't do something doesn't mean that you can't*
            are you an imbecile?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Can God permanently remove his omnipotence? I'm not asking if he would I'm asking if he could

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            >God can limit and delimit himself without losing his omnipotence
            That's the meaning of losing his omnipotence

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            how?
            what does "omnipotence" mean to you? "The most strongest"??
            to me, it means
            >can do anything

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            If it puts the limit of not being able to do something, he would become non-omnipotent

            Nothing can change God but God.
            Here's a question to Muslims, if God is "unchangeable" as they say, as they* define it, what is happening when God answers a prayer?
            What is actually occurring? If that person didn't pray, would God have blessed them according to their prayer?

            I don't have religion and don't know if God is personal like you Abrahamists for example claim

            Limiting infinity does not make infinity not infinity.
            (Infinity) - 2 = (Infinity) - 2
            the (Infinity) does not go away.

            So how could he become man in your logic?

            of course God "doesn't have to follow rules of logic"
            If God is real, then he doesn't necessarily have to obey* human concepts of logic.
            If you're an atheist, so be it.
            But if God is real, he necessarily transcends our limited understanding, try as we might.
            But God is still logical anyways.

            of course God "doesn't have to follow rules of logic"
            >But God is still logical anyways
            >God can be illogical, but it's always logical anyways
            ?

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          I think you missed the point and are the dingus here. The question is if God can crewte a rock he can't lift without nerfing himself.

  3. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    No the Father and Son are the same being, just distinct persons. The Son has aseity ontologically in being but not in person, as he is eternally begotten by the Father

  4. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why isn't an OMNIPOTENT being allowed to split Himself into individual avatars at will?

  5. 7 months ago
    Ο Σολιταίρ

    God can do and be anything he wants.
    If God says he is a Trinity, he is.
    If you say he CANT be, you are limiting the omnipotent God, you disgusting Muslim.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      So do you have a refutation of the argument?

      • 7 months ago
        Ο Σολιταίρ

        There is no argument. God is omnipotent. Saying God can't* do something (that is to say, he is limited by something outside himself) denies the omnipotent God.

  6. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Polytheists like Mormons believe in separate individual divine entities.
    The trinity represents three aspects of a single entity.

    It's not that complicated.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >The trinity represents three aspects of a single entity
      So each aspect is a part of the entity (God)?

      No. If I put on a weighted vest, and then took it off, would I stop being Solitaire?
      This is strange autism.
      God is comprehended as an omnipotent being with free will. Honestly ponder the implication of this.
      Do YOU limit and delimit yourself? Does that change who you are? Does your base "strength" or "power" change even if you limit yourself in some way?

      >Do YOU limit and delimit yourself? Does that change who you are? Does your base "strength" or "power" change even if you limit yourself in some way?
      I don't get your point. If God limited itself, he would change its power, yes.

      • 7 months ago
        Ο Σολιταίρ

        >I don't get your point. If God limited itself, he would change its power, yes.
        If my base power is 12 pull-ups, but I choose to put on a weighted vest and can only do 6 pull-ups, did my base power change? no
        Now, let's say my base power equaled infinity.
        That's God. No matter how he limits himself he is still omnipotent.

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Now, let's say my base power equaled infinity.
          >That's God. No matter how he limits himself he is still omnipotent.
          So it can't limit itself

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            Limiting infinity does not make infinity not infinity.
            (Infinity) - 2 = (Infinity) - 2
            the (Infinity) does not go away.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      The point of the argument is to show that either the Son isn't God or he's a distinct God from the Father. Do you have a specific objection to it?

  7. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Also, one question for Solitaire:

    Is God unchangeable?

    • 7 months ago
      Ο Σολιταίρ

      Nothing can change God but God.
      Here's a question to Muslims, if God is "unchangeable" as they say, as they* define it, what is happening when God answers a prayer?
      What is actually occurring? If that person didn't pray, would God have blessed them according to their prayer?

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        Solitaire do you actually have an objection to the argument or do you admit that it's logically sound but that God doesn't have to follow the rules of logic?

        • 7 months ago
          Ο Σολιταίρ

          of course God "doesn't have to follow rules of logic"
          If God is real, then he doesn't necessarily have to obey* human concepts of logic.
          If you're an atheist, so be it.
          But if God is real, he necessarily transcends our limited understanding, try as we might.
          But God is still logical anyways.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Where did you get this idea that God can do absolutely anything at all, even breaking the rules of logic? Do you have any reasons for having this view other than "God just has to be this way... ok??"

            There's plenty of very smart Christian philosophers that accept God can't perform logical absurdities

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            >There's plenty of very smart Christian philosophers that accept God can't perform logical absurdities
            okay, and?
            Logic is grasping at God. God is the originator of Truth. God is Truth. God IS logic.
            God trumps our logic, even as our logic tries to describe him.
            God comes first, then logic. Logic cannot come first. Logic is our attempt to describe God. It is valid insofar as it makes sense; yet, everyone knows that it is insufficient and ultimately... subjective.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            If God doesn't have to follow the rules of logic than any discussion about him is meaningless. We can't say a single thing about God because saying "God is X" or "God has X" or "God is X therefore Y" has to do with logic, which you say God doesn't have to follow. It's also self defeating because saying "God doesn't have to follow logic" implies that he follows the logical implication of that statement, which is that he doesn't have to follow logic, ad infinitum

            My point with bringing up the Christian philosophers is that you can resolve all these insane absurdities and still be a theist

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Logic is a means to an end
            Not the end in itself
            Notice how everyone has different definitions of what is or isn’t logical

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Notice how everyone has different definitions of what is or isn’t logical
            ? We don't (?)

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            If you didn’t
            Then there wouldn’t be a multitude of religions and philosophies in the world

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Ok, but just because there are errors in people's reasonings, it doesn't mean that there are multiple valid definitions of what is or isn’t logical

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            What is the one, single definition of “logical”?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Which follows logic's laws

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            If God doesn't have to follow the rules of logic than any discussion about him is meaningless. We can't say a single thing about God because saying "God is X" or "God has X" or "God is X therefore Y" has to do with logic, which you say God doesn't have to follow. It's also self defeating because saying "God doesn't have to follow logic" implies that he follows the logical implication of that statement, which is that he doesn't have to follow logic, ad infinitum

            My point with bringing up the Christian philosophers is that you can resolve all these insane absurdities and still be a theist

            Also you can't believe in anything the Bible says if you think God doesn't have to follow logic. Most Christians would say God is all good therefore he wouldn't lie therefore we can trust the Bible, but you can't because that implies God has to follow the rules of logic

  8. 7 months ago
    Dirk

    >One attribute of God is being independent.
    I'll assume you mean aseity
    > If the Son is dependent on the Father
    Not a facet of the doctrine of the trinity
    >then he is not God (because God is independent), but if the Son is independent of the Father then there's 2 independently existing beings
    Non sequitur

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Can you go a little more in depth than just saying "non sequitur"?

      • 7 months ago
        Dirk

        Only if you explain how you concluded that arrangement makes two beings. There's nothing to engage with, you just reached a conclusion that didn't follow.

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          Two beings relying only on themselves for existence and nothing else doesn't mean they're two separate beings? What are you talking about?

          • 7 months ago
            Dirk

            >two beings
            Presupposition

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Do you want me to say two persons? By beings I just meant the Son and the Father

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            If you want discussion to be clear you have to use established vocabulary appropriately.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not an expert in Aristotelian philosophy or whatever, I just meant being in the colloquial sense

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            The 'colloquial sense' is no sense in this case. Words need definitions.

          • 7 months ago
            Dirk

            Do you understand the position you're trying to refute?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Do you understand what "being" is?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            I thought no one can understand the Trinity?

            Aside from that can you refute the argument instead of playing word games about person, or being, or whatever

          • 7 months ago
            Dirk

            >I thought no one can understand the Trinity?
            Wrong
            >Aside from that can you refute the argument instead of playing word games about person, or being, or whatever
            I did

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            You didn't refute anything. You just say "non sequitur" or "presupposition" without any further explanation at all

          • 7 months ago
            Dirk

            That's a refutation

            Irrelevant for dependance

            Do you understand the position you're trying to refute?
            If the father didn't make the son, in what sense does the son not possess aseity?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Did you read OP?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Or do you not consider that God is independent?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're a sophist

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            >If the father didn't make the son, in what sense does the son not possess aseity?
            How the Son being begotten can possess aseity?

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            He's God.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Solitaire you're schizophrenic please take your meds

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            Good argument.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            How could I give you an argument when you don't even accept the rules of logic?

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            What are "da rules" of Logic?
            and how do we determine if something is logical?
            (this is rhetorical; I reiterate, I don't assert that God is "illogical", only, that human* logic is insufficient when describing God)

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I don't assert that God is "illogical"
            Not following the rules of logic is illogical

            >that human* logic is insufficient when describing God
            For one there's no such thing as "human logic", but also you do describe God with logic. As I've demonstrated to you your position is self defeating because saying "God is omnipotent therefore he doesn't have to follow logic" is a logical statement itself.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Not a facet of the doctrine of the trinity
      False

      • 7 months ago
        Dirk

        Show me

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          Begotten

          • 7 months ago
            Dirk

            Not made

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Irrelevant for dependance

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            What is "dependence"?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Needing for existance

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Category error

  9. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah, dependence and independence are undefined and vague, and it presupposes unitarianism (again)

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *