[SuperMykee]

Poor me. Here I am a lost atheist who is struggling to understand the Christian doctrine with the hopes of finding God but this gosh darn triune thing makes my brain hurt. You see, I have trouble buying that there exists more than one being (triune) and yet they are one




There exists more than one being (triune) = 1.(∃x)(∃y)~x=y
2.asm: (∃x)(y)y=x
3.(∃y)~a=y (from 1)
4.~a=b (from 3)
5.(y)y=c (from 2)
6.a=c (from 5)
7.b=c (from 5)
8.a=b (from 6 and 7)
9. ~(∃x)(y)y=x (from 2, 4 contradicts 8) It's false that there's exactly one being.



The problem is that there cannot be more than one and yet only one. help! I need spiritual guidance. pray for me.

[Mens Rea]

I promise you that not a single christer here will understand the logic symbols. Maybe DSD (a philo student) will be able to read them, but I doubt he'll take up the argument.

We may just have to accept that Christians are polytheists.

[SuperMykee]

Many early 'christians' were polytheistic.

[SuperMykee]

Oh, btw, this proof can also be used to argue against pantheism. A stance I used to be friendly with, but I find Spinoza's rejection of modal dualism to be absurd.

[SuperMykee]

Chriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiistians! my soul is awaiting!

[Mens Rea]

You have as good a chance of a Christer answering this as I do having my Hawaii argument answered.

[SuperMykee]

god damn, christers.

[paxil]

i've never looked to prove christianity from a philosophical perspective. i have however looked into it from a historical one and found alot of good historical proof that biblical records are rather accurate. unfortunately i cannot enter the logic debate. but i am open to counter arguments, i would like to read bertrand's russells book why i'm not a christian. i don't think that christianity will ever be proven. the only thing about using logical and mathematical arguments is that in ten twenty mayby hundred years time that argument may proved to be false. as with every logical argument. in the middle ages the christians at the time believed that you could actually prove christianity with such arguments, it took a while before their theories were proven incorrect. look up st Anselm for one.

You have to ask yourself do you conduct all your affairs from this logical base. and are all your decisions made by consulting logical arguments. for example do you eat meat, i've read the srguments for and against it and their is so far no logical argument saying that it is moral to eat animals. althjough beside the point to a certain extent, people don't conduct their affairs by consulting logic. and nor should they. because what is logical in this century may not be in the next. logical arguments proving or disproving the existence of g-d is wasted time. as our current level of logical thinking may not be where it is going to be, or should be. look at time travel it was totally impossible with our old understanding of physics, now some scientists are saying that there models could have been wrong. that's why i rather turn to historical arguments as to wether the events happened as depicted in the scriptures or not. again arguments can swing both ways, therefore it has got to be something other then arguments that lead people to beleive in the christian g-d or not.

[No Warning]

ooga booga

[granpoh]