What the hell is going on with this article? - π 05:08, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Quite frankly I don't think someone's chat log is the makings of a wiki article. - π 05:10, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Then where should I put it? I felt that the chat log would help show how Christians have difficulty describing the "3 and 1" nature of the Trinity. Plus "God is not a pretzel" is gold. AndroidWe are all machines 05:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Maybe my memory is hazy, since I read the book about two years ago, but I don't believe 2+2=5 was any kind of official inner party 'logic test'. Wasn't it something O'Brien found in Winston's diary? I also believe he would only accept that Winston was broken when Winston gave the answer 'I don't know', which was in line with the party's method of 'collective solipsism'. He did not like the answer 'five'. That was greeted with a nasty shock, or something similarly unpleasant. --√2 (talk) 17:58, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I get that you know little about this topic and that you honestly don't care, but even under these circumstances the article is pretty bad. Trinity is a Christian mystery and it is not meant to be fully understood by humans. If we did understand it, however, we should see that Trinity is not something that contradicts logic. On the human level one person is one being, and any two persons are two separate beings. Just like on a flat sheet of paper one square is one figure, and any two squares are two separate figures. On the Divine level you still find personalities, but combined in new ways which we (who do not live on that level) cannot imagine. In God's dimension you find a being who is three Persons while remaining one Being, just as a cube is six squares while remaining one cube. Of course we cannot fully conceive a Being like that: just as, if we were so made that we perceived only two dimensions in space we could never properly imagine a cube. --Earthland (talk) 19:06, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
- who is "you"? the authors of this article? Trinity is not "just" a mystery - or rather, even if it is a mystery it is one that can be addressed historically and biblical. there is no reason at all, in biblical studies that "it is not meant to be understood". that is an easy out, but it is not the view of the Roman Catholic Church, nor most protestant groups. they will tell you, by and large, that they do know what the trinity is. "In God's dimension you find a being who is three Persons while remaining one Being" that is ONE interpretation. it is not the only one. it is not the most common one when it gets right down to it. 1) The bible does not mention the trinity as such, anywhere. 2) the bible mentions the Holy Spirit but does not give any explanation of what the HS should be. Is it an emanation of God? Is it a separate being of god? is it like an angel doing god's bidding.?
- Churchs have traditionally tried to answer these questions, but as there is nothing in the bible to justify any of their answers, all they have is confusion and fights over dogma.En attendant Godot 19:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
- The Trinity (as a concept) can be much easier to understand if you read the texts in light of their socio-cultural and theological context properly. Check this and this out, for starters, to get a better idea on what primitive Christianity affirmed and what to evaluate and believe/refute, if you will.— Unsigned, by: bonbon / talk / contribs
The section about the logic of the Suctum Fedei is indeed correct for proper transitive logic, but not for informal transitive logic. Many Trintiarians argue it is this informal logic that is used and not the regular transitive logic. For Example, Mary is Sam's mother, Sam is Susan's father, but Mary is not Susan's Mother. She is her mother from an ancestral relation, but not directly her mother. This is an example of informal transitive relation. Of course I do not accept the trinity at all but just saying that the article did not mention this.Starcomet (talk) 12:19, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Well, St Patrick is said to have used shamrock to explain the Trinity. I do have something even more fun. Mystery-shmystery:
Your Jesus might be the Illuminati Jesus, or something like that
hello, i am a not signed in user, but simple traditional "Catholic" explanation is on www.ourladyisgod.com really all you need to know is the latin, and the dogma (NOT in the bible, except a ~1600 catholic bible) and theory of "baptism". also explains the multicoloured dreamcoat "jesuses" and fake "christs" of the bible, etc.
i apologize for length, but it is multifaceted a few key points to understand. yes, without "Background information" it wont make any sense. the "truth" of the catholic trinity is simple though with proper background/definitions. (Self-defining? perhaps. a dirty trick anyone could have made up? perhaps. but you will see why it was supposed to conquer prior trinities/etc. and why catholics claim it is the true one.)
nominum interpretatio tells you why the fake jesus cries out to elias. because they wanted to stick with 72 names of sephiroth/kabbalah encoded in old testament. "lord god" of genesis "elias" didnt want to give up his throne (still doesnt)
i dont suggest removing other explanations, just add this one, it is very simple.
 what problems the article has,  why those problems are problematic, and  how to fix those problems.
 see www.ourladyisgod.com for holy spirit versus holy ghost, different tenses of christ, and why holy ghost is "the father"
 because latin has tense "past spirit of god" versus "coming spirit of antichrist". "the lord" is old testament (and not catholic, which is "our lord" jesum christum) because "our lady" is not "mary of the bible" -- "bible mary" may not be 100% wrong, but think of "i met the spirit of michael jordan while he was alive" versus "i read a book once about him, after he was gone, translated 200 times". the catholic claim is they were actually there, got the unwritten common law tradition by word of mouth, put it in dogma (NOT in the bible), while the bible is just reading a book about chist, mixed in with old testament jewish scribes and many other pre-christ stories.
 i dont advocate "undoing" or "removing" anything, just a simple traditional catholic explanation (NOT "holy spirit") is easy if you see mentioned website and read through it.
in short, mother of god + father of god == god the son. they had a baby you pervs. big whoop. the first 2 never came down to earth. hence why christ had to. in essence, the whole objective was "heaven" wanted to bring the spirit of "god" down to earth, so we would not be stuck in prior wrong "gods" and "lords", and through baptism/exorcism, like a game of tag, we can get rid of bad prior spirits who werent really god out of people, and keep the supposedly real spirit of "god" one going. i am neither mocking nor quoting dogma, just aiming for a simple explanation of "theory" of how it is supposed to work.
why is this the supposedly "true" trinity to catholics? well, anyone can come up with one. see hegelian dialectic, spinosism (substance or objectively what something IS, versus flesh or subjectively what something LOOKS like). subjective/objective may or may not agree or disagree. in other words, people make up their own trinities all the time. it is simple so-called "sexual magick". the catholic one is supposed to have the only true "parents of god" which themselves are god (having sent their son down to earth to save us).
the point is, supposedly the catholic trinity was/is objectively correct, so the magic "god juice" passed down to their son. the other trinities a human made up, hence you follow the chain up to who stated that trinity, you probably just get some dead jewish scribe.
that may not be "miraculous" but from a "negative" standpoint, it is probably a more of "hold on to this one, let the other false trinities come and go". in a sense, we can say the other trinities have incurable contradictions, because they dont have really have mother god or father god as parent. so, the "True" trinity will be the only survivor (assuming it is true). in other words, "God" doesnt really have to do anything, the false ones will all fade it (or, everyone gets tricked into worshipping the wrong ones, or lets the jesus juice disappear from earth due to lack of baptisms. hence "apocalypse" "abomination of desolation" -- noone kept the game of "tag" going, so lucifer became god (where "lucifer" means any other trinity/etc.) )
their "christ kid" who came to earth was "god" because he overthrew prior egyptian osiris/isis/horus.
the second redeemer/christ and "holy spirit" is antichrist. "christ" is a title" hence why you need latin to determine which is which.
our lady == mother of god holy ghost == father of god jesum christum == son of god and also god (because his parents were god, the spirit passed on to him, he inherited it. SIMPLE, YES?)
now, there is a metaphysical type thing, that if you get one right, hopefully the others will find you/you will find them. hence the rosaries/etc. but really you want all 3, because any other parent you get a different son. "holy spirit" and "our lady" == the "jesus" that results is not 100% antichrist, but 2/3 antichrist.
with just "jesus" even if you get the correct one, without proper parents: how do we know he is REALLY "god" ?
how to spot fake jesuses and fake christs in bibles/etc.: just ask them who their parents are. if not our lady / holy ghost, you have an imposter masonic/illuminist jesus on your hands. — Unsigned, by: 18.104.22.168 / talk