Search Results
6/18/2025, 1:52:27 PM
>>507834482
You're correct. There is no sensible explication of the Trinity that doesn't conflict with logic or with some other dogma.
The trinity dogma is an unfortunate feature of mainstream Christianity that Christians are obliged to defend, even if it makes no sense. There is some evidence in the Jewish writings of the NT that suggests that there is more than one single divine figure, but this was taken to absurdities as theology was systematised within the ruling hellenistic philosophical paradigm. It didn't have to be this way. Early Christians had a choice on whether to intellectualise their religion in order to compete with established schools of thought, or whether they should remain rooted in practice and accept that the message of the cross was considered foolish. But no, they just had to explicate the tentative, vague ideas in the NT and encode it in dogmas that were to be binding on every believer on pain of anathema. So from time of the great church councils on Christianity was basically a mess, trying to retcon their dogma into the NT and trying to make 2+2=5.
Just accept that NT Christianity was *not* an intellectual religion and that later Christianity is a low IQ trannymutt of a religion.
>>507844630
>2025
>still being this mindbroken by hellenistic metaphysical notions
You're correct. There is no sensible explication of the Trinity that doesn't conflict with logic or with some other dogma.
The trinity dogma is an unfortunate feature of mainstream Christianity that Christians are obliged to defend, even if it makes no sense. There is some evidence in the Jewish writings of the NT that suggests that there is more than one single divine figure, but this was taken to absurdities as theology was systematised within the ruling hellenistic philosophical paradigm. It didn't have to be this way. Early Christians had a choice on whether to intellectualise their religion in order to compete with established schools of thought, or whether they should remain rooted in practice and accept that the message of the cross was considered foolish. But no, they just had to explicate the tentative, vague ideas in the NT and encode it in dogmas that were to be binding on every believer on pain of anathema. So from time of the great church councils on Christianity was basically a mess, trying to retcon their dogma into the NT and trying to make 2+2=5.
Just accept that NT Christianity was *not* an intellectual religion and that later Christianity is a low IQ trannymutt of a religion.
>>507844630
>2025
>still being this mindbroken by hellenistic metaphysical notions
Page 1