From: jimruttshow8596
The Jim Rut Show hosted a discussion with Jordan Hall, a frequent collaborator, entrepreneur, thinker, essayist, and talker, to explore the assertion that “if you understand the Trinity correctly, the Christian God becomes logically necessary” for any possible world, including all multiverses [02:05:00] [02:37:00]. Jim Rut, a self-proclaimed “total scoffer” with respect to religion, challenged this claim from a scientific and philosophical perspective [01:18:00] [01:22:00] [01:19:00].
Arguments for God’s Existence (Jordan Hall’s Perspective)
Jordan Hall structures his argument in three main “Roman numerals”:
- Relational Ontology as Ontological Primitive: A triadic structure, fundamentally relational, is the “bootloader” of all conceptual and ontological characters [07:45:00] [07:52:00]. This contrasts with “substance ontology” which assumes objects can exist absent relationship [08:41:00] [26:41:00]. Hall argues that the concept of “relationship” intrinsically invokes “relata” (the things in relationship), making it more primitive than objects themselves [26:02:00] [28:23:00]. Reality itself is found in the relationship between subject and object, not strictly mapped to the object [14:14:00] [29:07:00].
- The Christian Trinity as the Ontological Primitive: The specific triadic structure of the Christian Trinity maps to the fundamental philosophical concepts of unity, multiplicity, and relationality [09:06:00] [37:19:00].
- Unity: The godhead or wholeness of God [37:45:00].
- Multiplicity: The three persons (hypostases) [37:53:00].
- Relationality: The intrinsic relationship between and among the persons (e.g., Father in Son, Son in Father) [37:59:00]. Their shared relationship is the oneness [39:00:00].
- Becoming: Included as the “proto of change” [38:21:00].
- Hall argues that this structure, often appearing in other domains (e.g., a marriage, a company), is ultimately derived from the most basic version, the Trinity, which is the “platonic form” of this characteristic [43:35:00] [43:50:00] [44:50:00].
Persons of the Trinity
Jordan Hall notes that the Greek term hypostasis (persons) is probably more properly translated as “instance” or “instantiation,” like in software, rather than “person” as commonly imagined (e.g., Michelangelo’s depiction of God) [44:06:00] [48:56:00].
- Second Person (Logos/Son): That of which all forms of logos, narrative, or incarnation participate in and embody [46:16:00] [46:21:00]. This includes the “language of nature” with its coherent patterns and minds that perceive them [50:05:00] [55:01:00]. The Logos is the universe itself, or creation, containing top-down constraints (like natural laws) and the playing out of those dynamics [54:47:00] [55:19:00] [55:46:00].
- First Person (Father): Represents the transcendent constraints that enable and disable possibilities within the system, like the natural laws that allow for increased complexity in the universe [55:46:00]. The Father’s essence is found in the relationship between the Son and the Spirit [10:52:00]. This includes the characteristic of “begottenness” (lineage, distinction with continuity) and “proceeding” (holding together things that are different without singular identity) [10:09:00] [11:06:00].
- Third Person (Holy Spirit): Represents the “pure playing outness” or the energetic aspect of the world’s unfolding [56:04:00]. It enables both distinction and unity, showing how multiplicity and wholeness are produced [13:06:00].
All three persons are part of a single, integrated whole, with relations between them and with the system itself [59:00:00]. This theological construct, which incorporates unity, multiplicity, and relationality, is argued to be unique to Christian theology [10:07:00] [10:24:00].
The Concept of Faith and Belief
Hall argues that “belief” (pistis/faith) is not merely a mental operation or an acceptance of nominalist terms or ideologies [09:55:00] [26:27:00]. Instead, it is an existential commitment or a “way of life” [10:02:00] [10:16:00] [10:33:00].
Etymology of
pistis(Faith)Jordan Hall traces the word “faith” back to the Greek pistis from the New Testament, noting its use by Plato. Plato distinguished three forms of belief [13:52:00]:
doxa: Opinion; nonsensical things that “kind of work” but are mostly like children’s stories or mere opinions (e.g., belief in wood fairies) [13:55:00]. This is often what modern “religion” is, or what the New Atheist movement misidentified as “faith” [14:00:00].pistis: Embodied, deeply intimate relationship with a domain of reality through engaged experience or mastery [13:52:00]. This is the wisdom of a surfer or musician who cannot fully articulate their knowledge in words, but lives it [13:55:00]. It is the capacity for well-honed, harmonious, nuanced, and intimate relationship [14:03:00].episteme: The ability to perceive underlying principles, grounding in Platonic forms; intellectual understanding [14:09:00].For Hall, “faith” in the Christian sense is
pistis, a “livingness,” an embodied relationship with reality [14:19:00] [14:20:00]. It is the full grappling with existence, expanding one’s life to be in relationship with the “largest possible scope” or the “fully integrated wholeness of life” [15:01:00] [15:08:00]. The Christian God, being a “personal God,” invites this kind of living relationship, not just intellectual assent [15:13:00] [15:30:00]. This aligns with Christ’s teachings to “live a more wholesome life” [16:09:00].
Reconciling with Biblical Literalism
Hall argues that biblical literalism is a relatively recent phenomenon, emerging in the 19th century as a reaction to European biblical criticism [01:57:00]. It falsely presupposes that scripture should be understood like journalism or science [01:58:00].
Scripture as "More True" than Fiction
Hall contends that scripture is “substantially deeper” than journalism or even science [01:59:00]. He compares it to “good fiction” (capital ‘L’ literature) which, while not literally factual, can convey “vastly more true” insights about human existence and deeper patterns of reality than journalism [02:00:00] [02:02:00]. Scripture, in this sense, is “more true” because it is more capable of facilitating relationship with reality over a broader scope of cultures and contexts [02:04:00] [02:05:00].
Hall also notes that academic biblical criticism is often “mediocre literature” influenced by academic fashion and power structures, with conclusions that often lack closure [02:04:00].
For Hall, the Christian God’s “isness” is embodied in the unfolding of all scripture, from Genesis to Revelation [01:56:00]. Christianity, properly understood, is “wired into its very base” that God is mysterious and intrinsically beyond human comprehension, requiring humility rather than ideological grasping [01:50:00]. The Trinity, as a logical construct, formalizes this deeper reality, moving from the theological to the existential domain [01:51:00]. This ultimately leads to cultivating a deeply embodied, intimate relationship with the whole of reality [01:56:00].
Counterarguments and Skepticism (Jim Rut’s Perspective)
Jim Rut expressed significant skepticism towards Jordan Hall’s assertions, particularly regarding the specific claims about the Christian God.
General Skepticism and Philosophical Stance
- Scoffing at Religion: Rut maintains his stance as a “total scoffer with respect to religion” [01:18:00].
- Metaphysical Speculation vs. Belief: He enjoys metaphysical speculation but objects to “people believing it” [01:16:00].
- Rejection of Platonism: Rut states he has “always rejected platonism,” meaning the idea of platonic ideals existing independently [02:29:00]. He views terms as “language games” that describe the universe, not the thing itself [02:20:00].
Ontological Objections
- Rejection of Pure Relational Ontology: Rut disagrees that relationality is prior to substance. He argues that substance and relation must coexist, and one cannot be prior to the other, citing Whitehead, Russell, and Heidegger as agreeing with him more than with Hall and Filler [03:51:00] [03:35:00] [03:47:00]. He maintains that objects and their relationships are intimately interconnected and equally real [01:10:00] [02:37:00].
- Universe Precedes Consciousness/Language: Rut criticizes human-centric views (like Heidegger’s) that don’t account for the universe existing long before human consciousness or language [05:00:00]. He argues that the universe evolved for billions of years before life or animals appeared, showing a “story” or “dynamic” independent of human perception [05:11:00] [05:32:00].
Objections to the Trinity Argument
- Trinity as Nominalism/Analogy: Rut views the mapping of universal attributes (unity, multiplicity, relationality, origin, unfolding, lawfulness) to the Trinity as mere “nominalism” – simply assigning Christian names to existing phenomena [01:19:00] [01:33:00]. He argues that it “adds no information” beyond what physics and complexity theory already describe [01:15:00].
- No “Explanatory Gap” for Science: Rut argues that physics, particularly when combined with complexity theory, sufficiently describes the universe’s unfolding, including the emergence of complex phenomena like marriage, without needing a further “theological” explanation [01:16:00]. He acknowledges that physics currently doesn’t explain why its laws are as they are but doesn’t see a logical necessity for a God to bridge this gap [01:00:00] [01:10:00].
Objections to Faith and Christianity
- Faith Without God: Rut notes that he has lived a life of engagement and adventure (what Hall defines as “faith” or pistis) since age 11, “without any faith whatsoever in the Trinity” [01:32:00] [01:33:00]. This suggests that “faith” as an existential commitment does not necessitate the existence of the Christian God.
- Religion as Social Control: Rut views religion, including Christianity, as initially invented or evolved as a “mechanism of control of other people” [01:33:00]. He cites Edward Gibbon’s observation that Roman magistrates found religions “useful” [01:47:00].
- Rejection of Biblical Literalism: Rut strongly rejects biblical literalism, viewing the Bible as “good fiction” that tells us something about “what it is to be human” but is not literally or journalistically true [01:53:00] [01:59:00]. He points out inconsistencies, such as two creation myths in Genesis [01:57:00].
Conclusion
Despite a wide area of shared philosophical ground, particularly in the cultural and relational aspects of religion and reality, Jim Rut ultimately remains unconvinced of the “logical necessity” of the Christian God as presented by Jordan Hall [01:40:00] [01:43:00] [02:08:00]. While Rut finds Hall’s definitions of reality, emergence, and faith (as lived experience) compelling and applicable to his own life, he sees no necessary bridge to the specific historical or theological claims of the Christian Trinity. Hall, however, believes he has presented the argument for the logical necessity of the Trinity as understood through its most fundamental, relational characteristics [02:08:00]. Further discussion would be needed to address the historical Incarnation and Resurrection of Christ as logically necessary, a step Hall believes can be made [02:07:00] [02:08:00].