From: jimruttshow8596
Jordan Hall, a long-time friend and collaborator on The Jim Rutt Show, asserts that the Christian God, when the Trinity is correctly understood, becomes logically necessary for any possible world [02:08:27]. This assertion forms the basis of a deep dive into metaphysical speculation, particularly concerning the nature of reality and belief [00:51:51].
The Foundation: Hierarchical Concepts and Ontological Primitives
Hall proposes a “hierarchical stack of concepts” to think clearly, where deeper concepts necessarily imply higher-level ones. For instance, understanding velocity requires prior concepts of position, change, and time [01:21:55]. At the very bottom of this stack lies an “onto-epistemological event” – the most fundamental thing from which everything else is directly or indirectly derived and, therefore, necessary [01:13:04].
Fundamental concepts residing at this deep level include:
- Being and Becoming: Change is necessary for becoming, and being has the capacity to change [01:33:14].
- Unity and Multiplicity: Also referred to as sameness and difference [01:38:55].
- Continuity and Symmetry: Identified by John Vervaeke as powerful concepts at this level [01:39:58].
- Reality: Defined as the relationship between subject and object, not strictly mapped to the object [01:42:06].
Jim Rutt notes that his typical complexity lens aligns with this view, emphasizing that both “the dancer and the dance” (objects and their relationships) are intimately interconnected and cannot be discussed separately [01:44:02]. He argues that objects and relationships are equally real and co-exist, with relationships being as real as the objects themselves [02:40:50].
Substance vs. Relational Ontology
Hall distinguishes between substance ontology and relational ontology [01:43:52]. He argues that relationship is the ontological primitive, claiming that the concept of relationship implicitly and necessarily contains the relata (the things in relationship). Conversely, a substance ontology, which posits that an object can exist separately from or out of relationship, leads to materialism and decontextualization [02:46:08]. He states that the “most real is relationship” [02:59:00]. This deep-seated “groove of an objective substance sensibility” in Western thought often leads people to unconsciously import a substance ontology [02:59:00].
Jim Rutt pushes back, suggesting that many philosophers, including Russell, Whitehead, and Heidegger, would agree that substance and relation must coexist, and neither can be prior to the other. He argues that the universe, in its form of being and becoming, is about the co-creation of these two things [03:58:04].
The Triadic Structure and the Christian Trinity
Hall connects these philosophical primitives to the Christian Trinity. He asserts that the Trinity embodies:
- Unity: The Godhead or the Oneness of God [03:47:45].
- Multiplicity: The three persons (hypostases) [03:53:00].
- Relationality: The intrinsic relationship between and among the persons [03:59:00].
He highlights that the shared relationship is the Oneness [03:59:00]. Hall uses the analogy of a three-person marriage: one marriage (unity), three people (multiplicity), and complex relationships between them and with the marriage itself (relationality) [04:15:00]. The “body of the marriage,” he notes, “is pure relationality” [04:51:00].
Jim Rutt acknowledges the mapping but asserts that it is merely an analogy or “fairy story” lacking existential proof. He refers to Kant’s argument that “existence is not a predicate” [03:55:00], implying that describing something perfectly does not mean it exists. Hall clarifies that hypostasis can be better translated as “instance” or “instantiation” rather than “person” in the human sense, to avoid anthropomorphizing the Trinity [04:47:00].
The Trinity and Reality’s Unfolding
Hall differentiates between the philosophical (how we think about reality) and the theological (the structure of reality itself) [04:29:00]. He argues that structures like the Trinity are derivations of the most basic version of reality, serving as a kind of “platonic form” (though he retracts the “platonic” label, emphasizing it’s not a purely abstract form but the basis upon which reality sits) [04:39:00]. Every concrete example of this triadic structure is an instance of the more basic Trinitarian structure [04:49:00].
Hall explains the persons of the Trinity in terms of their roles in the unfolding of reality:
- The Father (First Person): His essence is found in the relationship between the Son and the Spirit. He “begets” the Son (distinction with continuity, lineage) and the Spirit “proceeds” from the Father (discontinuity with wholeness, symmetry) [01:09:57]. This characteristic of “begottenness” and “lineage” is a necessary component for any world [01:10:39].
- The Son (Logos / Second Person): All forms of “logos” (narrative, incarnation, language, nature’s laws) participate in and embody the second person of the Trinity [04:26:00]. This includes the implausible propensity of reality where observations coordinate with theory, which is an aspect of the Logos [01:19:00].
- The Spirit (Third Person): The Spirit is the relationship of the Father and the Son, enabling both distinction and unity. It plays the role of how objects emerge (distinction) and how communion/wholeness is produced [01:13:00].
Jim Rutt finds this account of the universe congruent with the physics story of its origin, lawfulness, and emergence of complexity. He states that the physicist’s view of the universe’s unfolding is analogous to this Trinitarian framework but asks how this theological framing adds information beyond nominalism [01:17:00]. Hall counters that it applies across domains (e.g., marriage, not just physics) and represents a deeper underlying truth.
The Nature of Belief: Pistis (Faith)
Hall draws a crucial distinction between belief as a strictly mental operation and belief as an existential commitment or way of life [09:59:00]. He argues that the notion of belief as a mental operation is tied to substance ontology, whereas belief as existential commitment is naturally bound to relational triadic structures [10:02:00].
He redefines faith (Greek: pistis) by looking at its historical use by Plato, distinguishing it from:
- Doxa (Opinion): Nonsensical or superficial understandings (e.g., “wood fairies make wood burn”) [01:35:55].
- Episteme (Knowledge): The perception of underlying principles (e.g., scientific knowledge, Platonic forms) [01:36:05].
Pistis in Plato’s context refers to embodied, deeply intimate relationship with a domain of reality gained through engaged experience or mastery [01:37:00]. It’s the “music” of understanding, which goes beyond mere words (the “lyrics”) [01:38:05]. When Paul uses pistis, he means the cultivation of a “well-honed, harmonious, rich, nuanced, subtle, intimate relationship” [01:38:56]. Thus, “living without faith” is seen as living without ideology (nominal belief), but with faith as an existential commitment to navigating life well [01:44:50].
Biblical Literalism
Hall addresses biblical literalism, noting its relatively recent emergence in the 19th century as a reaction to European biblical criticism [01:57:56]. He views it as a misunderstanding of scripture, which is “radically deeper than journalism, radically deeper than history, radically deeper even than science” [01:59:12]. He suggests that scripture is akin to “good fiction” or “great literature” [01:59:58]—it may not be literally true but provides access to deeper patterns of reality in a high-dimensional universe our minds cannot fully grasp analytically [02:00:00].
Conclusion of the Argument
Hall concludes that the Christian Trinity, properly understood, is not an ideology but an invitation to a personal, embodied relationship with the whole of reality. This relationship is not impersonal but “I-Thou,” requiring engagement with the totality of life [01:45:58]. The argument for the Trinity is about logical necessity, not historical reality, and provides a coherent logical construct for understanding the necessary characteristics of anything that could be called a “world” [02:08:10].
Jim Rutt remains unconvinced that this interpretation provides anything more than an interesting nominalist mapping, not a logical necessity for the existence of the Christian God as described in the Bible from a literalist perspective [02:09:07].