[Traveler]

Originally Posted by chriscb

I like how Mike Warnke explained the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. He compared it to homemade apple pie. Mmmmmm. Now, he wasn't talking about that frozen store bought stuff. He was talking about the kind Grandmother would make. You cut three equal pieces but you don't take it out of the pie pan. On the outside, we see 3 divisions but on the inside (under the crust) it's all one apple filling. So, I suppose the same can be said of God. On the outside we see 3 divisions (Father, Son and Holy Ghost) but on the inside is one divine essence.

The problem with the above explanation is that it ignores some very important ancient notions of G-d. The Hebrew word for one G-d is ehad. This word brings into context wholeness. Meaning that G-d is whole and complete without anything necessary that is or can be missing. In math we define this notion as necessary and sufficient. If there are parts or ways to differentiate G-d outside of the wholeness one does not understand G-d in that they have an “impure” or incomplete understanding. To me the Trinity is so inwardly contradictory that I have concluded that such thinking “compartmentalizes” the G-dhead persons outside of understanding of what makes G-d or man whole.

When I have pointed out the inward contradictions of the Trinity I am told by Trinitarians that G-d cannot be understood by man and that is what makes G-d so great a G-d. I understand this thinking to reference someone that is not born of G-d and therefore is not one with him therefore impossible to have a whole or complete understanding or concept of G-d that enlightens and makes man whole – not confused.

The Traveler