According to Catholic theology the Trinity is "God". Neither of it's components are.
And when you try to diverge and say that "The Father is God" and "The Son is God" then, by the law of identity, "The Father is The Son".
And when you insist that "The Father is not The Son" then you have left rationality and no thinking being will take you serious.

According to Catholic theology the Trinity is "God". Neither of it's components are.
And when you try to diverge and say that "The Father is God" and "The Son is God" then, by the law of identity, "The Father is The Son".
And when you insist that "The Father is not The Son" then you have left rationality and no thinking being will take you serious. — ArmChairPhilosopher

Yeah, that did cross my mind. The Sancta Trinitas is a contradiction in and of itself! Ex falso quodlibet (the principle of explosion): A logic bomb meant to blast through walls ideas seem to erect around themselves, a meme trap, imprisoning our minds! However, it feels a bit excessive, I would've preferred a controlled demolition (selective) instead of a thermonuclear warhead (indiscriminate). I once likened the Holy Trinity to a Zen Koan. The objective: Cause a mind crash! You could compare it to malware (viruses, worms) - malicious payloads but deployed with good intentions!

The Holy Ghost is a one-armed cripple! :joke: — Agent Smith

From pulling so much bullshit out of its ass?...

From pulling so much bullshit out of its ass?... — ZzzoneiroCosm

Enema? Constipation? :chin:

This is a paradox one might come across if they consider God's omnipotence. If the answer is yes, then there is one thing he can't do (lift a heavy enough rock), which contradicts the definition of omnipotence (being able to do anything). The same applies if the answer is no. How would you solve this paradox? — Cidat

"Man is quite insane. He wouldn't know how to create a maggot, and he creates gods by the dozen." - Michel de Montaigne

Someone can claim that "God" is omnipotent, omniscient, and/or omini-whatever else they can think of but does that really mean that that is what "God" is. At times it may seem like fun to try and guess what God may be like, but it is a given that a man can not understand what "God" might be any more than an ant could understand what a man may be like. In most cultures where people are not indoctrinated with Abrahamic religions (which pretend to know what "God" is and wants), it is taboo to speak of such things because it often just descends into madness. It is also taboo/heresy in cultures with Abrahamic religions to talk about such things that are not part of the "official" doctrine since such beliefs more often than not conflict with existing beliefs.

In truth, what "God" is most likely (or what we can know) is merely the super-ego part of our mind telling us what to do or not do. To understand how this is, or why it even exist I suggest you read up on Julian Jaynes's "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" on how early man didn't quite have a consciousness or what we think of "ego" in today's world and only something like the primitive animal like "Id" and the "super-ego" ( a subconscious collection of social rules morals, ideals, etc.) to guide primitive man in his day to day survival.

The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Origin_of_Consciousness_in_the_Breakdown_of_the_Bicameral_Mind

If you REALLY want to see how "God" and your super-ego actually work, I suggest you try to talk to "God" at least once if not several times a day about whatever you feel like. My guess it usually takes anywhere between 6 months to around two years before you will start getting answers in your head from either "God" or your super-ego. From what little I know about the theory and whatever explains how this works, primitive man usually didn't have to spend years trying to talking to "God" before he answered because almost as soon as they became semi-mature they would naturally start trying to talk to gods or "God" without really even being aware of it.

And one last thing, it likely helps if you actually believe in "God", super-ego, or whatever it is that you are trying to talk to. Be aware that whatever conversations you have, "God"/ super-ego/or whatever it is you talk to you may not like what it is they have to say. Also as far as I know, Abrahamic teachings often frown on this way on trying to understand "God" (verses trying to understand from their books and teachings) since one's own super-ego/"God" says to them can obviously tell them things then what their books say and when that happens they say you are talking to devils or demons and not "God". Just consider it if you are someone that tries to follow one of the Abrahamic systems of beliefs. If you don't then I guess you really don't have too much to worry about.

The Afortiori Paradox of Omnipotence

Miracles are invariably attributed to god(s). Mircales are, as per Hume, improbable events. Surely (?), if god(s) are as great as we think they are, they should be able to do the impossible!!!

The paradox: The argument is backwards in terms of the concept of a fortiori. It should've been if god(s) can do the impossible, for certain they can work miracles (improbabilities).

Anyone have any idea how to resolve this for me!

if god(s) are as great as we think they are, they should be able to do the impossible!!! — Agent Smith

God can not do what is logically impossible, such as making 1 + 1 = 3

God can not do what is logically impossible, such as making 1 + 1 = 3 — SpaceDweller

:snicker: