|Sunny Days in Heaven
Spiritual/Political/Philosophical Blog on the Nature of Truth and Falsehood and Heaven
Monday, June 27, 2005 A Thought on the Trinity
Christians have a difficult time explaining to inquirers and non-believers how God can be One and Three Persons.
The best explanation I had previously come up with is this: We think of our Selves as having three distinct parts -- Mind, Heart, and Soul. Yet we cannot tell which one leaves off and another starts, even though we readily talk about what's on our mind, in our hearts, or bears upon our soul and conscience. We are three and we are one.
The problem with this is that it is a verbal construction. Are we really certain that we are heart, mind, and soul divided? What about body, too? So the analogy can be broken down with some force.
But consider this: Man is a social being. From whence does this need for society derive? It can only come from an original source which has this quality, ergo God. God is social in himself. But if so, how can he be only One person? He must be more than that to be a social being in himself.
Socialness must come from God since we cannot possess that which doesn't exist in Reality. That is, we cannot have love, altruism, and compassion if our Creator did not possess those qualities himself. We would not recognize anything as Beauty if the sense of it were not inherited or inherent in us.
The same is true of socialness. We are not complete if we are alone. Even if we were one with God, the need for others like ourselves would remain and arise.
This does not prove God is Three. But it gives some strength to the notion that God is not necessarily determined in Oneness as the Jews and others might insist. It wedges into the claim that God can only be a singular Person and nothing else. His very socialness demands further explanation and open minded examination. That God is social in himself makes it possible for Christians to insist that our claim be taken seriously and not readily dismissed.
Will it work? Probably not as a primary means of persuasion, but it is a further demonstration in an argument which adds more weight to it. posted by Mark Butterworth | 3:48 PM |