/lit/ - Literature

Possibly but doubtfully

No. The trinity is a philosophical abomination. God is the one, The all encompassing monad. And then from him proceeds all duality and then plurality in that order

>>11678603

NO

>>11678603
Yes

>>11678603
Fulton Sheen, like a lot of Anglo Catholics, is a beautiful aphorist. I like his writing more for its poetry than it’s intellectual verity.

>>11678603
Typical homosexual twink dog whistling to his twink friends. Just look at the clothes he's wearing. Homos need to get cremated alive.

>>11678620
>The trinity is a philosophical abomination
for you

Why is it a trinity and not just Father and Son? Is it just because people like thinking in threes? The Holy Spirit feels a bit like a third wheel on a bike tbph

>>11679325
...eg the OP quote, in fact. It's a near argument, but he doesn't mention the Holy Spirit and I don't see any need for it in that system.

>>11679334
*neat, not near

>>11678603
Why do Abrahamics posit their arbitrary axioms as if they're uncontested truth?

>If there is only one God, what does He think about?
What? What does this question even mean? How do we even know God "thinks" in the same we way do? What if God is above all thought?

>He thinks an eternal thought, or about His Eternal Son.
What the fuck? How is this logical conclusion? Why doesn't he think about His Eternal Daughter? Or His Wife? Or about chicken pie?

>If there is only one God, whom does He love?
Doesn't He love everything? Isn't He love itself?

>He loves His Son
And we get shafted?

>and that mutual love is the Holy Spirit
Why isn't it the Holy Erection? That's certainly the way most Catholic Fathers view their spiritual sons

>I firmly believe that the great philosopher was fumbling about for the mystery of the Trinity
Yeah, because your arbitrarily "all-encompassing worldview" dictates you co-opt the ideas of men who would've laughed at your ideas had they heard them

>But it was not until the word became Incarnate that man knew the secret of those relations and the inner life of God
Why? Because your church says so? Because your scriptures - that your church assembled - say so? Are you implying that God let pre-Jesus humanity languish about in spiritual ignorance? Why would the loving creator of us all allow an arbitrary group of people not live in a time of the full truth?


tl;dr, no OP, he's not "correct", because the only way he can be is to accept the axioms he takes as true to begin with. I might as well say I'm correct by claiming that the universe is just a giant cosmic fart, and anyone who disagrees with me just doesn't know the truth.

>>11678620
t. Gnostic heretic

>>11679334
...hang on, I'm an idiot, he does mention it. Still see no need for it to be a separate entity as opposed to a property of the other two/one, though.

>>11678603
This is why Chr*stians should not be allowed near the Greeks.

>>11679349
Not him but the pre-Christian, pre-biblical world certainly had a spiritual sense. Just look at the ancients for plain truth of that. But yes, for whatever reason (and I know this will be unsatisfactory) God had not revealed Himself exactly yet, except through the conscience and natural law, and love and beauty.

>"He is a man in the world, but he towereth above all triple-powers and will raise himself above them all.

The number 3 and Trinitarian thinking are integral to radical Evil.

>>11678603
God in three persons (e.g. Trinity) actually solves the philosophical problem of how can a singular God/entity be capable of love, if there was a point in time in there was no one that God could love (which would be before the creation of the universe)
You can't exactly love yourself, because that wouldn't be "love" as love is "putting someone else before yourself", so God already being a Trinity, or 3 persons in loving communion, makes Him be capable of love/all-loving

It would then make logical sense for God to create the universe (in which God would make the universe for its own sake, not something God would "need", as needing things would make one not omnipotent and then make you not a god)

>>11679303
Isn't that picture basically modalism?

>>11679325
Because the Trinity is a political copout.

Christianity, in ita early daysz was divided into three groups:
>"Father-Worshipers", aka God-Fearers. Gentiles who worship the tribal god of the Jews, Yahweh
>"Son-Worshipers", aka Messianic Cultists. Focused on Christs promise of bodily resurrection and eternal life within a human lifetime after Christ's death.
>"Holy-Spirit worshipers", an initiatory mystery cult based on cultivation of one's relationship with the Holy Spirit.

When Constantine was doing his reforma of Rome, he needed to replace the religion of Rome because the old elite were so firmly entrenched in the system via religion (mystery cults and priesthoods). He chose Christianity because it was basically as far from a religion of the elites as possible. In order to get people to actually convert to his new religion of choice so he could replace the bureaucracy however, Constantine needes to reform Christianity. The resulting council cut away a lot of the groups Romans would find unsavory (the classic example is the Gospel of Eve, which promoted spermatophagy). This council also decided upon Christian doctrine and holy texts because early Christianity was made up of a multitude of patchwork cults each with their own gospel (so one would use Peter, another Paul, another Matthew, etc).

This is where the Trinity comes in. Christianity, drawing from Judaism's henotheistic origins, is monotheistic. So who do Christians worship, given that there's three groups who are all Christians with significant power who disagree? Simple, just declare them all the same god by political fiat. The most popular branch of Christianity at the time, Arianism, explicitly rejected this. Government action was necessary to keep the Arians from taking total control and shattering the peace between the three groups.

The Holt Spirit cultists were the smallest od the three and were wiped out overtime, so the Holy Spirit is sort of just a third wheel in the Trinity because no on knows what it's actually supposed to be.

>>11679679
This is all fascinating, do you have any books/sources for all this?

>>11679709
This book here is pretty much the defacto source on Roman psychology and culture at a human level as opposed to a superficial one. That is to say, it looks at thought processes as opposed to just saying the Romans ate garum and gladiators.

The rest is mostly cribbed from various books and academic papers over the years. This is all pretty basic stuff though.

>>11679723
Thanks friend, I know exactly what you're talking about in terms of psychology. If your explanation of the Trinity is true then it really fucking explains everything. It's such an awful doctrine that it could only be the bastard result of a forced theological solution to a political problem.

>>11679285
Agree´d

>Pic is disagreeing tards

>>11678620
Muhammad pls, just go fuck a goat

>>11678620
based and Plato-pilled
Everyone else here believes in irrational Middle Eastern Semitic bullshit.

>>11679786
>literally tawhid
>not Middle Eastern Semitic bullshit
neo-platonists are cute

>>11678603
yes

>>11679285
>Fukken saved
Fukken saved

>>11678620
This, a truly infinite god is strictly mutually exclusionary with an absolute duality. The only way those could simultaneously with an infinite god could only be as conditional realities within it, or else it's no longer infinite.

>>11679723
>jewish female writor working at a leftypol university interpreting the feelings of ancient Romans through (((psychology))), making assertions not substanciated through her apendix or logic to try and shittalk christianity, the jewish arch enemy since they killed christ himself
You have fallen for kikery.

>>11679993

>His disciples said to him, "Who are you, that you should say these things to us?"

>Jesus said to them, "You do not realize who I am from what I say to you, but you have become like the Jews, for they (either) love the tree and hate its fruit (or) love the fruit and hate the tree."

all the way down...

>>11679349
>Why do Roman Catholics* posit their arbitrary axioms as if they're uncontested truth?
FTFY, Orthodox theology is very different.

>>11679679
The trinity is clear in the New Testament, the early church fathers taught it before Constantine was even born. And they argued against the fringe heretics and gnostics without any political motivations. Baptism in the trinitarian name was the standard.

>Simple, just declare them all the same god by political fiat.
This is retarded and not historically accurate at all. Constantine had very little input on the matter, and poor understanding of theology. He just wanted consensus so he called the major bishops of Christendom to settle the matter. Out of 300 all but 3 agreed that the Son was eternal and uncreated.

>The most popular branch of Christianity at the time, Arianism, explicitly rejected this
Again more nonsense.
>Government action was necessary to keep the Arians from taking total control and shattering the peace between the three groups.
If Arians were the major branch of Christianity then banishing their 3 representatives would definitely "shatter" the peace, but this wasn't the case because they weren't the major branch and everyone agreed they were wrong.


>The Holt Spirit cultists were the smallest od the three and were wiped out overtime, so the Holy Spirit is sort of just a third wheel in the Trinity because no on knows what it's actually supposed to be.
Why do you talk about things you dont understand and havent even researched fairly?

>>11680061
>Why do you talk about things you dont understand and havent even researched fairly?
Because a olitically motivated kike with a real shitty sense of aesthetics considering the cover comforted his anti-christian bias.

>>11679786
>semitic bullshit
Oh fuck off back to /pol/

Lame bastardization of neoplatonism tho
Try Plotinus' 4th and 5th aenead and some Proclus

>>11679650
Oh shit, guess we all have heresy in our browser caches now.

>>11679303
I think this is the most Faustian drawing I have ever seen

>>11679650
not really, think about it as illustrating pic related

>>11680018
Care to elaborate?

>>11680980

>>11680980
>>11681092

The number 3 is integral to radical Evil.

>>11681168
Go back 2 /x/

>>11680980
>>11681092
>>11679303
Best posts.
Triquetra, mandorla, vesica piscis, etc. Similar concepts, different manifestations. Do people not even know where the Jesus Fish comes from?

>>11679361
The Gnostics were the only theologians who actually knew what they were talking about. The Nicene trinity is a convenient fiction to consolidate power.

The Real Holy Trinity:

Existential Groundlessness
Insatiability
Fear of Death

>>11681474

Consider the delirium of Time, where you are crucified between the past and the future. Consider the delirium of Space, where every dimension is a spoke of a breaking wheel. Consider the delirium of the Other, preceding and outlasting you both in absence and in presence. Such abomination is impossible without 3.

>>11678620
cringe and heresypilled

>>11679723
>reading books written by a woman
your opinion has been discarded

>>11680987
>its all just a mystery bro
thats pretty much it, no hate for ortho-bros though

>>11679303
Manuscript art is aesthetic as hell

>>11681499
I dont actually, can you explain?

>>11681695
And this is evil, in what sense of the word?

>>11681857
<--- crude drawing, but here you go.

>>11681865

In all senses, Evil itself.

>>11681607
So you're just ignoring the fact that all three Persons of the Trinity are mentioned in the Gospels, then?

>>11678620
siri what is consubstantiality

>>11679349
>im a lifeless prick and I can't appreciate beauty in philosophy

>>11681900
>>11681499
I thought Jesus Fish was an acronym.

And I've heard that it was a way for early Christians to communicate without fear of persecution.

>if your were a Christian and you suspected someone else to be, you would start talking to him and trace an arch in the dirt with your foot. If he proceeded to do the same, that meant he was also Christian (the two arches make the fish symbol).

>>11681900
The path is narrow

>>11681740
raised ortho, not ortho anymore
but you're right lol

>>11679786
The trinity is NOT a Jewish invention. What we did was writing the Bible, then those Greek and Roman sonofabitches took it from there. Also, don't lump us up with other semitic peoples, they did nothing those irrelevant bastards.

>>11679993
>I hate Jews!!!!
>literally worships jew

>>11682328
basically another triquetra, or the axiom of maria, if you are more alchemically inclined.
>>11682324
the origins of the symbols stem from the vesica piscis. the zodiac symbols for pisces, of course, are fish. sacred geometry and paganism were the initial source of the symbol. even the seed of life, the flower of life, and the fruit/egg of life, and, finally metatron's cube, all come from this geometric symbol.

>>11682445
Oh boy, you're starting to uncover part of the mystery note what you are doing is sin; I know you do not realize it yet, But I pray for you.

>>11682309
He's not saying some nice poetic aphorisms, he's saying what he considers to be the literal truth of the universe. If someone is making bullshit claims, I'm going to call them out on it.

>>11682487
>what you are doing is sin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRHetRTOD1Q

>>11682517
Dude stop larping as a Christian.

>/lit/
>quality board

>>11678603
>an eternal thought
>singular
This is the problem with Catholic writers. They enjoy writing romantic sounding things which have ZERO scriptural basis. Although I agree many philosophers were ultimately attempting to grasp God, we do not know God's thoughts, nor his inner life in that sense. This is unscriptural. You see similar problems with Merton, Sertillanges, and others - they sacrifice logic for style and sound theology for showmanship, as this man has.

>>11682375
the Holy Trinity is from the old testament, you filthy lying talmudist "Jew"

You think the church fathers and Jesus Christ pulled the doctrine out of nowhere?

>>11679349
This is entirely psuedological. You're right in questioning his logic, but you aren't knowledgeable or rational enough to know where to go in your thoughts. You need more study.

>>11683572
Watch your mouth, if you're going to claim the name of Christ. He'll have you answer for it.

>>11678620
why is the simplest, most obvious answer so hard to swallow? this is the only functional baseline axiom for any logical system but people insist that one is three and the only implications of this profoundly different ontology are that those that don't accept it are in for a world of pain.
philosophers never should have donned robes, if they had stayed in wine pots all of these tent preachers would never have gotten work. that's where plato messed up.
i'm gonna jerk off and thank god for aesthetics.

>>11682397
>talks about christianity
>doesn't know the basics