The Instigator
Zidane
Con (against)
The Contender
Flint489
Pro (for)

Trinity is Logical?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Flint489 has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/29/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 675 times Debate No: 102805
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (0)

 

Zidane

Con

I realized, that this theme somehow was some kind of old schooled, or just out dated, but I wanted to know, if there is a trinitarian out here to prove that trinity is logical, or it is just doctrinal by the churches (like how I thought). So maybe someone may create an open statement first, about the logical of it, then we may refute each other. Thank you.
Flint489

Pro

Thank you to my opponent for allowing me to debate on the topic of the Trinity in Christian Theology.
I don't know if I will be able to shed some light on the subject and/or possibly make good debating material out of this, but I believe that the Trinity is logical. I am a Southern Baptist who has been confused by this subject much in the past.
God is a combination of the Holy Spirit, Christ Jesus, and the Father.
They are each a part of God, but they are not each other, much like how your arm is a part of your body, but it is not the same thing as your leg.
It has been explained to me also in this way:
God is like your phone. On your phone, you can receive messages in various ways.
One way is through the calling function, another through the texting function.
The texting function is not the same as the calling function, but it is on the same phone.
Therefore: Christians do not serve three gods, they serve one God that has three forms.
Debate Round No. 1
Zidane

Con

Thank you Flint489 for your words. But let me get some thing straight first, The father distinct from the word, and the word distinct from the spirit, and also, the spirit distinct from the father.

According to you're analogy, you are saying, that "it is on the same phone", now consider this, the phone that sent you the message is the 'god' (the one that gave you the message), now the 'text', the 'call', or any other type of messenger, is the 'messenger'. So, when you say that the text is the message, and the call is the message, you know that the phone is not the message too, right? Now consider this again, the father, is the 'phone', he sent the son (John 20:21), as the 'call/text', and also, the son, prayed to the father, so that the father will send the spirit (John 14:16), you will not say that they are one, right? So my point is, I think you are using the wrong analogy, because I can also use your analogy to say that the phone is the father, and his messages were sent through his messenger which is the text or the call, the son and the holy spirit. And that analogy will only destroy the trinity itself. Thank you for your time by the way.
Flint489

Pro

I understand your response.
You said "The father distinct from the word, and the word distinct from the spirit, and also, the spirit distinct from the Father." I agree that they are each distinct from each other, but together they "make up" God.
On the phone analogy, I meant that the phone is just all of the ways of communication combined, and was not really talking about the phone being also a distinct being, just talking about how the texting and calling functions are separate, but part of the same group.
The Trinity is simply the combination of all three distinct ways God reaches out to humans.
I'm sorry that the phone analogy caused a bit of confusion or is wrong, but the point of the analogy is this:
God is made up of three different, distinct, persons.
Those three distinct people are not each other, but together they make up God.
Debate Round No. 2
Zidane

Con

Before my rebuttal, I would like to thank you for your arguments.

"Together 'they make up' God". This, I must say, is the worst part of talking about the trinity, why? Because you are simply saying that 1+1+1=1, correct me if I'm wrong, but there are no single bible verse where it is stated that together they made up one god.

"God reaches out to humans". When God wanted a message to be sent to a group of people, isn't it natural in the history that God will sent a prophet? Now consider John 20:21, Jesus clearly stated that he was sent by the father. How come some one that was sent by the God is God too? They literally distinct, so if you call each of them god, there will be three Gods, it's simple logic.

And please bring up biblical verses next round to prove whether trinity is logical,biblical, or just simply doctrinal.
Thank you for you're time and attention, by the way.
Flint489

Pro

Thank you for your rebuttal.
There is no verse that states that they are one God, but in Genesis 1:26 (1) God states "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness". This states "our", meaning plural, proving that we are not only in the likeness of the Father, but also perhaps the son.
When I say "together they "make up" God" I mean that they are each a third of God. They "make up" God because of they, together, are God. However, they are completely separate from each other.
When Jesus was sent by his father, he meant that he came out of his own will, because he is his father. Again, they are one person, separated into different segments.

Another few verses that talk of a Trinity is:

2 Corinthians 13:14 (2)
John 10:30 (3)
Colossians 1:15-16

Thank you,

(1)-https://www.biblegateway.com...
(2)-https://www.biblegateway.com...
(3)-https://www.biblegateway.com...
(4)-https://www.biblegateway.com...
Debate Round No. 3
Zidane

Con

Very well, let me refute your argument.

"There is no verse that states that they are one God". What do you mean? I can give you some biblical verses that will distinct and separate them, and simply declared one God, and that the trinity isn't biblical and logical, here it goes :
- "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord:" (Deuteronomy 6:4)
- "And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:" (Mark 12:29)
- "And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:" (Mark 12:32) confirming verse 29.
- "And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him any question." (Mark 12:34) Jesus confirmed verse 32.
- "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." (John 17:3)
- "I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do." (John 17:4)
From these verses, I would like to highlight these things :
1. Jesus proclaimed, that 'our' (including Jesus himself) God is one.
2. When the 'scribe' came to him, and verify Jesus's words, Jesus agreed.
3. Jesus was sent by the only true God, and finished the work given to him, yet, trinitarian claims that he is a God. I will not deny the fact that he is one of God's way to sent His messages to the people, but by saying him as a God, or the part of God, it is simply against the bible and logic.

"Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness" (Genesis 1:26) If you are trying to convince me that this verse refer to trinity, I would like to tell you, that it's not, by stating a plural pronoun, you actually telling me that the God is plural, not one like the bible and the doctrine said. And if you read the next verse, you will find that God is simply singular.
"So God created humankind[e] in his image,
in the image of God he created them;[f]
male and female he created them."
(Genesis 1:27)

"They "make up" God because of they, together, are God. However, they are completely separate from each other." How come this is a logic, let's take an analogy, a team, consists of three different man, they together gather to share common interests. Now will you explain God as a team? No, because you will destroy your own doctrine, since you will also state that the 1st person is the part of the team, not the team itself, right? The same condition applied to the 2nd and the 3rd person. You can't say Jesus is the part of God, because there are no biblical evidence, look at my first argument, there are verses that distinct himself from God, which contrary to the belief of 'Jesus is God' or 'Jesus is part of God'.

"When Jesus was sent by his father, he meant that he came out of his own will, because he is his father. Again, they are one person, separated into different segments." I've proved to you how they completely, radically, distinct and different. Consider all my arguments up there, then consider for yourself, is your argument valid?

Thank you for your time and attention,
Hope that you will refute.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Zidane 1 year ago
Zidane
@Sardukar It is alright to be told that way. Unfortunately, I'm here looking for a logic and proof, not just doctrines.
Posted by Sardukar 1 year ago
Sardukar
I'm no expert on the trinity but I believe the point of it is that the parts that make up it up are not distinct from one another. That's how it's always been explained to me anyway lol.
Posted by Zidane 1 year ago
Zidane
@sardukar when you see three distinct person create a team, I think it is justified to say a+b+c = team. You can't multiply them.
Posted by Sardukar 1 year ago
Sardukar
1*1*1=1

One means the same thing throughout.
Posted by Zidane 1 year ago
Zidane
@canis my argument of saying 1+1+1=1 surely based on something, because of my opponent's argument that stated, 'together they make up god'

@Me-justme You simply distinct them, by calling them separately, I mean, if truly this doctrine is pure monotheistic, why not in the name of the god? by stating "in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19), it doesn't justify that they're the same person, aren't they? You know that Father is not the Word, the Word is not the Spirit, and the Spirit is not the Father, therefore, this 'baptize' occur in the name of 3 far distinct person, and when you call them all god, you can not justify one god.
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
Letters. 1+7 = 3..If that is what the letters tell you...Some sort of "logic"....
Posted by Me-justme 1 year ago
Me-justme
Easy- Matthew 28:19 "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the NAME," (singular), "the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit..." 1 God, 3 persons
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
1+1 is 2. The logic.....No "1"..No, (+) No "1"...No logic..Logic is based on "something".
Posted by Zidane 1 year ago
Zidane
@missmedic Maybe you call it supernatural, but for me, god is about the believe that there must a creator to every creation, but there must be an end for this 'creator-creation' chain, why? Because if you keep continue, then you can only conclude that there is no start for this life. Therefore, in my conclusion, I can say that god has the highest supremacy over any other creatures, and it does not exist as a trinity.
Posted by Zidane 1 year ago
Zidane
@missmedic Maybe you call it supernatural, but for me, god is about the believe that there must a creator to every creation, but there must be an end for this 'creator-creation' chain, why? Because if you keep continue, then you can only conclude that there is no start for this life. Therefore, in my conclusion, I can say that god has the highest supremacy over any other creatures, and it does not exist as a trinity.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.