Wednesday, January 14, 2009

The Wikipedia entry on the Trinity

Here is the wikipedia entry on the Trinity. Now you all understand it perfectly, right?

My favorite Trinity story came from Eldridge Cleaver (not related to Wally and Beaver). He went to a class on religion in which the nuns asked him to give his understanding of the Trinity. The idea was supposed to be to show that no one could truly understand the Trinity. Only, he thought he did understand it. It was like Three-In-One Oil.


Ilíon said...

Do those who assert that the doctrine of the Trinity is illogical (and thus, necessarily, false), as opposed to difficult or impossible for us to *really* understand, ever claim that the scientific doctrine of multiple personalities is illogical (and thus, necessarily, false)?

Dan said...

Funny, i was just reading this wiki-entry two evenings ago. what are your more specific thoughts on the way it is presented? What would make it better?

(I'm sort of a theological and philosopical novice who took one of Dr. Repper's classes a few years back ("I dabble...") and I'm not sure i'm qualified to offer any sort of intelligent discourse on the goods and bads of the wiki entry. But I'm curious... that has to count for something, right?)

Ilíon said...

Dan, expertise is rarely a requirement, and frequently not even important.

What is important is patient and critical thinking.

Evan said...

Ilion -- there is little science behind the diagnosis (not doctrine -- science has no doctrines) of MPD.

If you'd like to read more, check here.

Ilíon said...

Evan: "not doctrine -- science has no doctrines"

Evan, you clearly don't know what you're talking about (on several levels). Are you science-worshipper, as you seem to be?

And, you clearly didn't try to understand what I wrote within the context.

Victor Reppert said...

Dan: I have trouble faulting the site, given what it is, a Wikipedia entry. I'm not sure that helps.

Mike Darus said...

I thought it was quite good. It is hard to say that much about the Trinity without stumbling. I was disapointed that it did not do more about defining "person" in this context. I am not sure I could do it well myself so I can't complain too much.