4
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
'''Trinity Analogy'''
{{stub}}
'''Trinity Analogy'''
It seems that the best way to think of what the Trinity is, are in the terms of an analogy. It should be what we already have observed to be present and accepted.
If the Trinity is to be recognized as how God Is, should there be some evidence of this conceptually and perceptually in our world today?? Creation must logically mimic its’ Creator in some way, should it not??
The following is accepted without question in the realm of science:
'''Space''' - which is made up of length, width and depth. Length is Space but it is not width or depth. Width is Space but it is not length or depth. Depth is Space but it is not length or width. All three when separate, length, width and depth are Space and when combined is Space.
'''Time''' - which is made up of past, present and future. Past is Time but it is not present or future. Present is Time but it is not past or future. Future is Time but it is not past or present. All three when separate, past, present and future is time, and when combined is Time.
'''Mass''' - which is made up of solid, liquid and gas. Solid is Mass but it is not liquid or gas. Liquid is Mass but it is not solid or gas. Gas is Mass but it is not solid or liquid. All three when separate, solid, liquid and gas are Mass, and when combined is Mass.
If the above is correct why are there so many objections to the conceptual and perceptual knowledge of the Trinity??
When:
'''God''' – which is made up of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Father is God but He is not Son or Holy Spirit. Son is God but He is not Father or Holy Spirit. Holy Spirit is God but He is not Son or Father. All three when separate, Father, Son and Holy Spirit is God, and when combined is '''GOD'''.
Why is the logic of the Trinity rejected when the exact same logic is universally accepted by science to explain space, time and mass??
==Quotes==
