I looked up Trinity on Wikipedia. It provided one of the most ponderous and baffling texts I ever read. It relies on some obscure terminology that looks specially created for the purpose. — Jacob-B
Is Christianity a monotheistic religion? — Jacob-B
this doctrine is a good reason to doubt Christianity — Relativist
Justification of belief in the Trinity requires ad hoc metaphysical assumptions that lack objective support — Relativist
Have you never considered religions before? A lack of objective support is normal and expected. — Pattern-chaser
Maybe you're being too literal? One God can have - or be referred to by - more than one name — Pattern-chaser
If we approach the Trinity less rigorously then it's a non-issue. — TheMadFool
Exactly. So why turn it into one? :chin: — Pattern-chaser
Matters of religion are not easily considered in a literal manner. The whole issue is more about spirituality and the like, not logic and literal truth. — Pattern-chaser
That makes religion too flexible for some people's tastes and also not entirely true given the current science-religion controversies regarding Creation and the theory of evolution and cosmology. — TheMadFool
In my view, as a believer but not a Christian, those believers who oppose science on its own ground - with literal/objective claims, and the like - are mistaken and wrong. God can take care of Herself, and doesn't need zealots proclaiming Her objective existence in the scientific space-time universe without evidence. There is no disagreement between science and religion that cannot be simply resolved by reasonable and fair-thinking people. IMO. — Pattern-chaser
There is no disagreement between science and religion that cannot be simply resolved by reasonable and fair-thinking people. IMO. — Pattern-chaser
Unless you're further willing to say that those who are part of organized religion are simply not "reasonable and fair thinking people" — Hanover
In my view [...] those believers who oppose science on its own ground - with literal/objective claims, and the like - are mistaken and wrong. — Pattern-chaser
I agree but this common ground between science and religion seems to be impossible to find and this is probably due to, as you said, zealots on both sides of the issue. — TheMadFool
This just defines true blue religious believers pejoratively as zealots. — Hanover
Is it really a zealot who believes that if he prays for his dying friend, his friend may receive divine intervention? I think that's a mainstream belief among believers, but it's obviously not compatible with science. — Hanover
What can science say about prayer? Only that such experiments as have been performed have not detected any effect. But the comfort it gives to believers is not visible to science either. There is no significant contradiction here, unless a believer were to assert that prayer does have a literal and measurable effect on recovery. For there is no evidence for that. ... Today. In the future, who knows? We already know about the placebo effect. Shouldn't prayer have exactly such an effect, in some cases at least? :chin: — Pattern-chaser
I agree that the doctrine derived from the need to reconcile Jesus' divinity within the context of monotheism. — Relativist
This just defines true blue religious believers pejoratively as zealots. Is it really a zealot who believes that if he prays for his dying friend, his friend may receive divine intervention? I think that's a mainstream belief among believers, but it's obviously not compatible with science. If prayer actually worked, then those results would be published in the New England Journal of Medicine and would become prescribed treatment, right? — Hanover
it does take extreme ''enthusiasm'' to insist that something is true/false AND demand that ALL parties accept it as so. It's these people, who give no leeway to accommodate people of a different hue I'm referring to. Surely such people could be labelled with ''zealot''. Some might prefer ''fanatic''. — TheMadFool
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.