/lit/ - Literature

>>14970185
>proves the flawed nature of the holy trinity
lets hear it

>>14970185
>>14970201

>>14970201
It's fucking retarded because it contradicts the Unity of God and puts him on par with multiplicity which is imperfect. The first principle is unique and ineffable and stands above the Trinity which Christianity proposes.
In short:
God (The One, The Good and the Perfect) is immobile, ineffable and transcends all beings while containing all
The Trinity (finite, infinite and the unitary) is within The One but The One isn't part of The Trinity because that would break the flawless singularity of The One
Neoplatonists point out several flaws (like God taking six days to create the universe instead of creating it at once) in Christianity which they call just another sect of Gnosticism

>>14970253
The Ousia is the Ineffable and ultimate apophatic principle, it is supra-essential. One is Three and Three is One. It is above multiplicity and above mere unity. God here is completely transcendent because creation does not come from emanations of the so-called transcendent, ineffable One, but it is created ex nihilo, matter is created. Cosmogony does not become theophany. The monadic-triadic God is eternally Triune but He is not eternally creator like the platonic One. Here He is completely free for creation is the work of His Will and not of His Nature.
The logoi of every thing are idea-wills. The Divine Essence infinitely transcends the ideas; He creates freely by His Will and by His Wisdom and the logoi are contained in this Will and this Wisdom, not in the Divine Essence.
God lives in the Eternity, and it goes beyond the opposition of mobile time and immobile eternity. The eternity of the aeon, that is, the intelligible word is a created eternity and the mobility of time leading its sensible counterpart is its moving image.
There is no break and no flaw in the singularity of the Trinity which is One, it is plenitude of Love, Love itself, Other and Not-Other.
At last, I refuse to believe neoplatonists faced the six days of creation in such a literal manner.
>Thus the six days of Genesis describe for us in a geocentric fashion the unfurling of creation. These six days, which are symbolized by those of the week, are stages less chronological than hierarchical. Differentiating elements simultaneously created on the first day, they define the concentric spheres of being at the center of which man, who virtually recapitulates them, finds himself.

>>14970185
Christianity is the opposite of cuckolding.

Prove me wrong.

>>14970629
>my wife's son

Christianity doesn’t need to be BTFO, it does that perfectly well on its own.

>>14970629
Reminder that Christian worship is literally hours upon hours of apologizing for the fact that you’re a bad goy

>>14970615
>regurgitates memorized formulas
>still illogical

>>14970185
Who is the based MAN? That makes christcucks seethe in anger?

>>14970646
It’s not about just apologizing, but changing your ways, which is good for you.

The dogma of the trinity is the most retarded shit ever brainfarted, only by the tip of the sword could they have enforced that. Good thing we had the enlightenment. Too bad christcucks were not all killed.

>>14970662
It's good your YOU, Jew, not for me.

>>14970634
christcucks btfod

>>14970659
Damascius
>>14970615
>One is Three and Three is One.
That's exactly what i refuted. One being Three is an oxymoron. Multiplicity isn't Unity and is imperfect. The One can't be even One because it is beyond number while the triad is numbered.

>I refuse to believe neoplatonists faced the six days of creation in such a literal manner.
Plotinus did.

>>14970662
>mindlessly following the rules of some hysterical jew carpenter, rules which involve not resisting when enemies beat the shit out of you, loving those who fucking hate you and doing nothing when you get tortured to death
>good for you

>>14970634
That was fast.

>>14970646
>>14970676
imagine being so blind by jewish tricks that you think anti-christians want you to realize the Truth in Christ. The first requirement to be a jew is to be anti-christian.

>>14970634
Christcuckoldry is disgusting

Daily reminder

>>14970699

>>14970692
all those things are good for the soul, which is more important than the body. Anyway, you can’t really make a good case that being a good Christian is bad for you. Devout Christians tend to be the grateful, hopeful, happy, living meaningful lives and loving God and people.

>>14970703
>everyone who disagrees with me is a paid shill
This is your brain on /pol/

>>14970684
>That's exactly what i refuted. One being Three is an oxymoron. Multiplicity isn't Unity and is imperfect. The One can't be even One because it is beyond number while the triad is numbered.
The Monadic-Triadic God is not numbered. They are not three and one in numbers, but in ousia-hypostases. One being Three is peak apophasis it is above numbers, above oppositions.

>Plotinus did.
I love Plotinus, sincerely. But he was flawed. Do you understand a little bit more about what the six-day creation means?

>>14970629
>>14970634
>My wife and I are white evangelicals. Here’s why we chose to give birth to black triplets.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/04/21/my-wife-and-i-are-white-evangelicals-heres-why-we-chose-to-give-birth-to-black-triplets/
Just following the example of Joseph! Remember goy, there is neither Jew nor Greek!

>>14970721
whom are you quoting?

>>14970726
>The Monadic-Triadic God
Defining god according to neoplatonism it's already a mistake because it is so simple it cannot be grasped or defined, hence they call it ineffable. The Triad isn't related to The One except for its participation in it.

>>14970699
>don't fall for Jewish tricks, worship rabbi Yeshua and the god of Israel instead!
Wait, that?!

>>14970738
his delusions and retardation

>>14970720
>Anyway, you can’t really make a good case that being a good Christian is bad for you.

I just did. Following the principles of Christianity is utterly suicidal. None of the Christian conquerors actually followed any of their beliefs, and the only reason those beliefs are even around in the first place is because they make the masses docile and submissive. Idiots like you show its effectiveness, as you even thank your rulers for the chains they’ve put you in

>>14970708
>descendant of a long list of jewish patriarchs
As man jesus is fatherless, as God he is motherless.
He went against all the jewish literalism for which you are falling now. Good goyim!

>>14970721
Fedoratipping cretins itt are the epitome of /pol/tardation, you dumb quarantine tourist.

>Jesus is my lord and savior!

>>14970755
death comes to everyone. The pleasures of this life are meaningless

>the biological father

>>14970755
>I've read Marx and like, whoa man, opiate of masses. I'm enlightened now.

>>14970759
>if you don't believe in rabbi yeshua you're a fedora tipper
The absolute state of christcucks

>>14970744
God is not only his Persons, is this so difficult to understand? Saying God is Triune means saying that he is Love itself, plenitude of Love, He can't be defined. Read what I said about the Ousia again.
>The Triad isn't related to The One except for its participation in it.
It is not participation, it is by nature, essentially.

>can you take care of the babies tonight while I go out with Tyrone, I mean it's the CHRISTIAN thing to do
>uh, ok, I guess that's what Jesus would want...

>>14970764
It is when you subscribe to a nihilistic jew cult

>>14970253
>>14970615
So he was guilty of even more circular reasoning than atheists accuse Christians of? K

>>14970773
surely these kids do not love their white mothers as much as they would black or mixed mothers. bizarre

>go o a missionary trip
https://www.sheknows.com/living/articles/810428/go-on-a-missionary-trip/
Wow Christianity is so BASED!

>>14970756
>believes that a rabbi is literally god
>calls others good goyim

Beyond parody

>>14970784
Love is a earthly quality we attribute to things. You're bringing The One down to your material sphere.

>>14970779
>>if you don't believe in rabbi yeshua you're a fedora tipper
>The absolute state of christcucks

>Deus vult right brothers?

>his kippah fell off with excitement!

>>14970804
>rabbi
>anti-rabbinic man is a rabbi
GOOD GOY

>>14970808
Good is a earthly quality we attribute to things. You're bringind the One down to your material sphere.
Can you see how much of a dumbfuck you are?

>>14970790
it’s true regardless and you have nothing to refute it. When you die, every material pleasure you experienced will be meaningless. It won’t matter if you’re rich or poor, beautiful or ugly, wise or foolish. It all vanishes to nothing.
>19 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
>20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
>21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

>BASED! Just like rabbi JESUS!

>>14970830
>Good is a earthly quality we attribute to things
The Good doesn't refer to the quality but merely as a synonym for The One. It's basic semantics.

>>14970813
Wooooooah you showed him bro! This is my face after I saw your post! >>14970760
Praise Jesus! Can I get an AMEM????

>>14970813
Posts like these remind me that Christianity really is a joke that stopped being funny centuries ago. People like you simply have no comebacks. You have nothing clever to say as you keep holding on to a dying religion, from which any and all forms of sincerity and authenticity are completely drained. Now it’s literally just seething incels from /pol/ who channel the anger from not getting laid into fedora memes. How pathetic

>>14970845
The Love doesn't refer to human love either. It is a synonym for the relation in God as Three in One. That is why I said that it is Love itself, plenitude of Love, because nothing of it is grasped by us, it is an apophatic analogy.

>>14970831
>it’s true regardless and you have nothing to refute it.

There is quite literally zero evidence for the existence of any god whatsoever. There’s also zero evidence for your pathetic virgin rage revenge fantasy of a final judgement.

>He the lawd, he the lawd sun shiiieet

>>14970863
>I said that it is Love itself
>God is
>God
>Is
This is where you're wrong. The neoplatonists don't claim that The One is, they just call it The One or The Good. Even being is beyond The One because it came before the triad and Being.

>>14970253
Christianity is nothing like Gnosticism.

>>14970831
why are you even answering these subhuman hylics? these are the scum of the scum

>>14970185
Who?

>>14970692
It would have been better if Europeans became Zoroastrian. Also, Zarathustra wasn't even Persian, and he was most likely Sogdian, Scythian, or Sintashta, who had a lot of European admixture. His message grew among Persian populace though.

>*2000 years later*
Christians still have not refuted this.

>>14970857
>Implying that incoherent sperging of a rambling retard needs a comeback at all.

Christurds should be hunted down and killed like dogs, who down?

>>14970876
not who you're responding to, but isn't say that the one is good the same?

>>14970868
There’s only zero evidence for the people who don’t seek God. Even if there weren’t evidence, and it were equally irrational to believe or not believe, then it is still true that this life is meaningless, and so by preparing for the afterlife, we stand to benefit if it exists. By loving God and purging yourself of sin and love of this world can you do that. But even if there weren’t an afterlife, I would rather myself live this way, every time. If I could influence my future reincarnated self before being plunged into ignorance once again, I would try to make myself a Christian again. You can’t convinced I’m wrong, and you can’t convince me that I’m not happy. But look at yourself, and see if you’re happy. It doesn’t seem so.

>>14970889
That’s great incel, now go back to your containment board. I’m sure some sheeple need you to enlighten them on how the jews are the reason why you can’t get laid

>>14970894
Niggers should be hunted down and killed like dogs, who's in?

>>14970878
yes, I’ve done enough. Their pride overcomes them and makes the whole discussion pointless. Nothing will change the minds of people like that. I’ve never seen it happen, anyway, in religious discussions or otherwise

>>14970882
>European
spook

>>14970876
See how you are low and dishonest, after refuting all of your infatile misconceptions you are attacking the manner we express the divine, language itself. I said all we say about God is apophatic analogy. He IS obviously ABOVE BEING. It doesn't mean if we name his divine rays with divine names. Supra-being notion is above any conceptual precision. Gnosis in christianity is expressed by silence.
You said:
>The first principle is unique and ineffable.
Wait, the first principle IS? Lowercase principle? Then it is not the Principle?
>God (The One, The Good and the Perfect) is immobile, ineffable and transcends all beings while containing all
The One IS again? If he is immobile he is not ineffable, and he is not beyond oppositions?
You are a coward and a brainlet.

>>14970895
The Good is a synonym of The One but The One isn't The Good as that would imply duality.
>>14970897
>has literally homicidal fantasies about his enemies
>claims to be free from sin
>can't even get rid of his virgin anger
What a fucking moron man

>>14970919
Go to Israel.

>>14970897
>Even if there weren’t evidence, and it were equally irrational to believe or not believe, then it is still true that this life is meaningless, and so by preparing for the afterlife, we stand to benefit if it exists.

Right, unless the god you were supposed to worship was Allah. In that case you’ve wasted the only life you got worshipping the wrong god

>>14970923
>has literally homicidal fantasies about his enemies
who are you talking about?
>claims to be free from sin
not me
> >can't even get rid of his virgin anger
if anyone is angry, it’s you. If you say no, then I am even less angry than you. goodbye

>>14970934
Quran 2:62. If Islam were true I would hope to be saved by works.

>>14970745
>>14970736
OHNONONONONONONONONONONONONOOONONONONONONOONON HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>14970933
I don't like it.

>>14970789
lel his Facebook even looks like he’s posing for a meme
>why can’t I hold all these niglets???

>>14970920
>the first principle IS?
The First Principle is because it's a below The One. It can be called the Infinite or the All-in One
>The One IS again? If he is immobile he is not ineffable, and he is not beyond oppositions?
Again, I'm talking about The All-in One, The first principle, because calling the One a principle would be akin to saying it was generated by something else. The One above the All-in One can not be defined by any means, not even as The One.

>>14970634
>the background of Christ is what Christianity is all about
>a figure in Christianity means that we all shoud aspire to be like him
brainlet

Kill. All. Christcucks.

>>14970789
they should be thrown into the garbage. they look like literal shit lmao

>>14970976
Sloppy job Mossad

>>14970946
Quran 3:85 would like to have a word with you

>>14970965
>The First Principle is because it's a below The One. It can be called the Infinite or the All-in One
>The One above the All-in One can not be defined by any means, not even as The One.
The One, The One. The One that is not The One is above The One that is not The One, but The One that is not The One is The One that is not The One right? Therefore The One that is not the One is not the One that is not the One but The One that is The One. They are implied in each other and are constrained by the other.
You are falling for dialectical constraint.

>>14970985
based!

>>14970987
Islam means submission to God

>>14970999
So?

>>14970185

>>14970999
Yes, a very specific submission to God. One that involves recognizing Muhammed as the final prophet of God, and denying that Jesus was anything other than a prophet. Saying that he was the son of God is considered shirk and will get you a one way ticket to the fires of hell.

T. No one has read timaeus

>Plato idiot btfo
>can't explain the cyclic nature of Greek and Roman stylization within modern culture
>everyone christ cuck
>still mad mum woke you up all those Sunday mornings

>>14970958
>>14970947
>>14970978
Worst thing is he didn't adopt them.
HE MADE HIS WIFE GET PREGNANT OF TRIPLE NIGLETS!!!
That is your brain on christcuckoldry.

>>14971024
where do guenofag come into this?

>>14970965
>The First Principle is because it's a below The One.
So it comes from this other The One? So this First Principle constrains The One? If not, is this as absolute as The One? If not aboslute, does a not absolute constrains an absolute?

>>14971028
Choke on refugee cock christcuck

>>14971026
and yet there are Christians in heaven according to 2:62. Hilarious

>>14971030
I can't even fathom these levels of cuck. Off the fucking chart.

>>14971028
I have. I'm a christian and I think Plato was divinely inspired. The ''platonist'' in this thread isn't even aplatonist, he is an atheist resorting to anything to stand against Christianity. He is a low iq literalist and I have refuted all of his arguments not only today but in other threads too when he insisted on a literal reading of creation.

>>14971059
based

>>14971041
>what is verse 4:171

Wow, a Christian picking and choosing from a holy text, you don’t see that every day

>>14971059
based@

>>14971067
are there Christians in Islamic heaven or not? Am I going to hell for believing in the New Testament?

>>14971024
>>14971031
the ''guenonfag'' is the buddhist-atheist schizo who spams guenon threads in order to defile and turn guénon into a meme, to delegitimize him. I don't doubt he is the atheist /pol/tard spamming in this thread. Remember when people posted a picture of him on /pol/ baiting people into a discussion against advaita? He is miserably pathetic.

>>14971030
Apparently they couldn't have children so they instead used disposable embryos or something, she wasn't inseminated. Adoption or artificial methods was all there was for them.

>>14970615
>It is above multiplicity and above mere unity.
This sounds like your coping.
>What's that? Three is multiple?
>Well, no, it's "above" multiplicity dude
Seriously?

>>14971067
how did Islam interpret Jesus without the gospels? Why so much prophecy in the OT about Jesus if he isn’t really the last, true Messiah and that hundreds of years later Muhammed would appear out of nowhere to people in Arabians?! How anti-climactic and forced does that sound?

>>14971032
It doesn't come "from" because that would imply duality in The One. It just exists within the One.

>>14971059
>reading holy texts with literal interpretation
>these people are RETARDED
>if only these people listened to Sam Harris and hung out on r/atheism would a new epoch of human peace come into fruition

>>14971082
Meccan Period:
>Yes. Pls support me.
Medinan Period:
>No. Submit!

>>14971082

> According to the Quran, the basic criterion for salvation in the afterlife is the belief in the oneness of God (tawḥīd), Angels of God, revealed books of God, all messengers of God, as well as repentance to God, and doing good deeds.

Christians believe in the trinity, and believe that God had a son. That violates tawhid

>>14971111
>It just exists within the One.
>that would imply duality in The One.
So that which is not The One IS IN The One? So The One IS and IS NOT The One?

>>14971109
>the one is ineffable but still known and can be named
cope?

>>14971032
>So it comes from this other The One?
are these like trading cards? anyone know where I can purchase some?

>>14971109
>What's that? Three is multiple?
Because He is not only Three. But Three-One. Again, apophatic metaphysics isn't for bugman hylics.

>>14971110
>Why so much prophecy in the OT about Jesus if he isn’t really the last, true Messiah

It’s almost like they retconned all of it after the fact or something

>>14971141
Not him and just asking: Are you Orthodox?

>>14971109
Hegelian M/S dialectic tries to express the Subject/Object distinction which Plato defined in his theory of the soul composed of ousia, power, and energy. We are eternally bounded within a temporal frame that moves the image of eternity

>>14971130
>So that which is not The One IS IN The One
Yes, the One contains everything and nothing at the same time. The All-In One (infinity) is inside The One but isn't its attribute or related to The One at all.

>>14971141
>if you disagree that three isn’t one, then it’s, like, 2deep4u

>>14971129
It's not a literal son. It's a part of him here on earth that he sent so mankind knew how to reach heaven.

>>14971168
I hope Santa Claus will beat you with 30 shoes for your heresy.

>>14971086
stop letting me live in ur head lol

>>14971152
>The All-In One (infinity) is inside The One
>but isn't related to The One at all.
try again

>>14971161
>three-one is just like the one and the three i count
do you think a monad is literally the number one too?

>>14971147
no but i appreciate it

>>14971184
Bring it on.

>>14970756
...then why does the Bible go to great lengths to outline his genealogy? Obviously, Jesus is fatherless but the genealogy still has meaning otherwise it would never have been included. And that genealogy does indeed consist of a long list of "Jewish patriarchs."

>>14971218

>>14971241
makes you think

>>14971218
of course it has meaning. It clearly shows how Jesus stand in relation with the first books of Scripture, how he is like the seed of the first revelation and relation between God and man.

>>14971188
You can't argue unless you've read the neoplatonists

>>14970708
Jesus was indeed brought up according to the Jewish law of the time. Anyone who denies this would have a long way to go to prove that Jesus was not. However, this does nothing to alter the universal applicability of Jesus' message. And its transmission throughout the world and throughout time is a vindication of that universalism.
>muh Samaritan
He also appears to rebuke a Canaanite woman simply due to her non Jewish heritage. However, she nevertheless winds up being accepted by Jesus by seemingly beating Him at His own language game. It's almost as if the whole thing was an elaborate example on the part of Jesus for the benefit of His disciples - who up until that point had been purely Jewish revolutionaries. Let's not also forget His acceptance of the Roman legionary and His point about "outer darkness."

>>14971268
''neoplatonists'' is a term coined by protestants in the 18th century, and I have read some of them. Now what?

>>14971241
the whole purpose of the Incarnation is to bind God and man together again. Scripture makes this so obvious I don't know how it could be subject to controversy.

>>14971314
>''neoplatonists'' is a term coined by protestants in the 18th century, and I have read some of them
Uh oh Jay now you've done it, you are about to really set him off!

>>14971314
You didn't clearly read Damascius

>>14971141
>But Three-One.
That's a contradiction in terms. If you believe it isn't, then demonstrate how.
>isn't for bugman hylics.
Oh no! I am asking you to actually explain yourself! How terrible.

>>14971363
>can't grasp a simple theological concept

>>14971363
In the same way that The One being not one is not a contradiction, Three being One and One being Three is not as well. This is not a discursive quantitative conception, God, gnosis does not lead to discursive cognizance.

>>14971320
I have refuted all you said, pointed all your contradictions so in the end you tell me to read Damascius?

>>14971318
not jay

Take all """internet debate threads"""" off this board. Literally no one is changing their opinion either way if you post /b/-tier reaction images and worn out /pol/ tropes. All the arguments in this thread are just "x philosopher says this though! he btfo him!!!"

This goes for all the internet debaters on this board. This place is better for just recommending stuff. Debating stuff on here will just make you angry since no one here debates in good faith. Debates are conducted with green texts, wojak images, and ocassionally a long post that isn't even read. At best, someone will tell you "x thinker thought this." You are wasting your time.

>>14971388
The shield of the trinity is not a simple concept. It's a visual representation of the same essential problem. One cannot inhabit both "is" and " is not" at the same time. Or, if it can, there's nothing to suggest that this would be limited to a trinity.

Again, if you believe something can both be and be not, then actually explain how.

>>14971421
>This is not a discursive quantitative conception
Then why are we talking about it? Not only that, but if ineffability is your only defence, what is there to say you're right? "We cannot discuss it." Well, OK, by that same logic we can't really talk about its truth value either.

>>14971493
>telling God what He can and can't do using bugman tier logic
top fucking keks

>>14971523
What? I am asking you to explain your position. Either do that or fuck off.

>>14971493
>One cannot inhabit both "is" and " is not" at the same time. Or, if it can, there's nothing to suggest that this would be limited to a trinity.
Because it is in the Trinity that any dialectical tension vanishes.

>>14971511
But this is what I am doing, you are the one reaffirming quantitative notion to the Three-One. The divine names are Its operations.

>>14971577
>Because it is in the Trinity that any dialectical tension vanishes.
Explain.

>>14971577
>Because it is in the Trinity that any dialectical tension vanishes.
Except the Christian dogmas on the trinity I suppose.

>>14971609
>Explain.
bumping because I too am curious to know how it is that "in the Trinity that any dialectical tension vanishes."

>>14970789
Reminder the guy is the one going out to meet Tyrone.

>>14971609
>>14972137
because the trinity is not a dyad??? dielectical tension is dyadic

Plotinus (who never uttered a word against Christianity) was closer to Aristotle in many respects despite his critiques of him. Proclus is closer to Plato but Proclus' metaphysics is so ridiculous you have to reject Platonism and accept Aristotelianism.

>>14972390
>who never uttered a word against Christianity
According to the Christian Church that was in charge of copying his works for like 1500 years.

>>14972516
Its likely we would've had manuscripts like those of st. irenaeus responding to him if he actually did launch some sort of attack.

>>14972516
Cope harder. He had every opportunity to denounce it but chose not to. Porphyry does and we still have it. The best neoplatonists can come up with is "H-He didn't know about it, h-he thought they were just some tiny gnostic sect."

>>14970185
/6agtph6

>>14972527
>>14972577
Since it is firmly established that the Christians actively destroyed writings that went against their religion for as a religion it stands opposed to everything a virtuous person finds to be good, wholesome and proper. It is not at all more likely that his attacks would survive than not. Porphyry having managed to survive(only in quotes of Christians "debunking" him) is more of an exception, not the rule.

Plotinus also necessarily did not have to write a directed attack on Christianity because his philosophy itself proved their entire religion to be untenable.

>>14972171
so dialectical tension between two contradictory propositions is dyadic (= 2) and doesn't apply to the Trinity because the Trinity (=3) isn't a dyad (=2)? Is that the idea you are trying to express?

>>14972725
>Since it is firmly established that the Christians actively destroyed writings that went against their religion for as a religion it stands opposed to everything a virtuous person finds to be good, wholesome and proper.

>>14972802
>t. christcuck

>>14972725
lol what a cope. There are tons of ancient Greek philosophers that have been preserved. Monks even preserved pagan epics outside of Greece. Christianity is the heritage of tradition and Platonism is no exception considering how the Church fathers Origen and Clement of Alexandria were well versed in the matter.

>>14972860
>christians preserve a slither of grecoroman literature out of the 1000s of works they otherwise chimped out on
wow god bless those great protecters of the classical world

>>14972909
I see you aren't responding to your erroneous claim about Plotinus now. Keep coping

>>14972802
are you the same dude from last night in that other thread I think about Job?

>>14972860
The good old Christian subversion.
>destroy over 90% of written/oral literature
>take complete control over the modes of literature production
>once or twice there emerges a christian monk that actually thinks that destroying his European heritage is a bad idea so he manages to preserve a few percentages of it
>WE WUZ PRESERVERS AND SHIEEET WITHOUT US ALL WOULD BE GONE!
The preservation of pre-Christian European literature was accidental.

>>14972802
Just show us how many cross thread (You)s you get from these:
>>14965306
>>14965326
>>14965347
>>14965619
>>14965999
>>14966118

>>14973001
Can you read? What your chart shows is the reliability of the New testament, not about works that have been destroyed. Not preserving =/= intentional destruction.

There are innumerable reasons for which works are preserved and the fact that you think Christians would care about some random philosophers from Greece over the word of God is incredibly naive. Christians are obviously going to preserve what is more important. Are you deluded?

>>14973057
>Not preserving =/= intentional destruction.
Which is why the next step after having confirmed that almost everything was lost is to learn whether it was accidental or systematic. As in if the destruction was by a few overzealous but ultimately deemed heretical Christians that was incessantly fought against by the fathers and leaders of the religion. If this is not the case then the next course of action is to see if it was caused by either inaction by those who could stop it or if the destruction was preached by those very same people.

The results may shock you.
>"The tradition of the forefathers has been destroyed, the deep rooted custom has been torn out, the tyranny of joy [and] the accursed festivals . . . have been obliterated just like smoke." - Chrysostom
>"That all superstition of pagans and heathens should be annihilated is what God wants, God commands, God proclaims!" - St Augustine

>>14972769
The son is the word, The word of the father who is the one. The son is the second. 2 implies a chance of Eternal separation. 3 implies a final unity and completion. The first two are preserved as 1 and 2 and fully United in the third. The Trinity is the inner process of God. our doctrine of Christ crucified and his Resurrection is very important because it is literally God's word raining down, giving birth and returning to him. In the Hebrew tradition saying something three times is an expression of completion. That is why in a vision a prophet heard "holy holy holy..." When in reference to God. The fact that people cannot see that the god of the Old Testament is the same God of the New Testament reveals that they are Literalist and blind and cannot see the depths of reality or at the very least they have an autistic tunnel vision and can't understand that just because a different language is being used that the same truth is being spoken. One of the gifts of the holy spirit is the use of tongues.

>>14970629
christianity is basically a cucked judaism. jews were first and christcucks have been coping ever since

>>14973001
Oh there was definitely a problem at times with people destroying things that they shouldn't. Origen is a victim of this. He was a Christian but oh no he's a heretic!! Delete delete delete delete. Brainlets ruin everything I swear. But that's what you get when the lowest common denominator of the religions is the most popular. Because of this Muslims who always fight Christians etc etc.

The work of celsus is only preserved at all because of a Christian who refuted him. So even if heretical Works were not cared for they may still be autisticly refuted in the writings of Christians. things like the black plague and Wars will also play a role in what gets preserved in what gets destroyed. Even the very early Christian work The Shepherd of hermas is not fully preserved in the Greek.

>>14973188
very well put anon, and yeah many passages in the ot imply the triune God

>>14970253
how is making the universe in a few days a contradiction? i mean, you'd only care about time if you had limited resources or time, which god certainly does not

>>14970615
>we can discover God's existence from first principles like "the part cannot be greater than the whole"
>nvm "One is Three and Three is One" LOL
oh no no no no no

>>14970971
are you saying we SHOULDN'T aspire to be like Joseph... what have you got against the man GOD CHOSE TO RAISE HIM...

>>14970253
>multiplicty means inherent imperfection
lmao
Based on what? So a God who has more than 1 property is imperfect?

>God (The One, The Good and the Perfect) is immobile, ineffable and transcends all beings while containing all
Those are multiplicities, genius.

>>14974164
>So a God who has more than 1 property is imperfect?
A single being can have more than one property, jackass. Enroll in an elementary logic course.

>>14970736
>>14970745
THE TRIPLET NIGLET

>>14970185
Literally who? Sauce?

>>14974210
>A single being can have more than one property, jackass. Enroll in an elementary logic course.
God is both single being, one essence, manifested in 3 personhoods.

You're saying the property of multiplicity itself is an imperfection. And because the Trinity has that property, (even at the level of personhood), it is imperfect compared to the Monad. How?
The monad also has a multiplicty but at the level of properties (immutable, good,, perfect, ineffable, transcendent, immobile, etc), and at the level of it's emanations since it gave rise to multiplicity itself and there can be nothing apart from it, so multiplicity inheres within it anyway.

So why is it an imperfection when the Trinity has a multiplicty at the level of personhood but it's okay for the Monad to have multiplicty at the level of properties and while also being the source of and emanating multiplicty itself??

>>14974210
>>So a God who has more than 1 property is imperfect?
Can a God have the property of "imperfection" ? Because that's what you think multiplicity is, and apparently your monad has multiple properties...so ipso facto it's imperfect, connect the dots.

>>14974445
>You're saying the property of multiplicity itself
Multiplicity is a quantifier not a property. Enroll in an elementary logic course.

The Trinity is unity at the level of being or essence. It is multiplicity at the level of personhood or hypostasis.
There's no contradiction here, and Neo-Platonism is incoherent since it posits an insurmountable tension between the One and the Many, which never gets resolved.

>>14974468
>Multiplicity is a quantifier not a property
It's a quantifier of what? Of many characteristics or multiple properties in this case.
Your premise (which you just assumed) was that One = perfect while the Many = Imperfect.
Then you misapplied this standard to the Trinity because it has multiplicty of personhoods, which is unacceptable to you. Yet multiplicity of characteristics and properties is acceptable to you in the case of the Monad? Why? Why can the Monad have multiple internal distinctions but the Trinity can't?
None of your points were logically proven, you just repeat it, and then add some ironic insults about studying logic.

Go type more than 1 vague sentence and actually try to support your position.

>>14974010
there are no parts in the godhead you brainlet, the godhead is pure apophasis

>>14974582
being angry isn't an argument, take a deep breath, meditate, and try again.

>>14974556
>It's a quantifier of what? Of many characteristics or multiple properties in this case.
It's a quantifier along the lines of ∀ and ∃. Existence is not a property.

>Your premise (which you just assumed) was that One = perfect while the Many = Imperfect.
Sorry, that wasn't me.

>Then you misapplied this standard to the Trinity because it has multiplicty of personhoods, which is unacceptable to you.
It's logically impossible for the names 'a', 'b' and 'c' to designate the same thing if a ≠ b, b ≠ c, and a ≠ c.

>Yet multiplicity of characteristics and properties is acceptable to you in the case of the Monad? Why? Why can the Monad have multiple internal distinctions but the Trinity can't?
I don't know what that means. A single object can have many properties, but it cannot be numerically distinct from itself.

>None of your points were logically proven, you just repeat it, and then add some ironic insults about studying logic.
Look again.

>>14970253
>would break the flawless singularity of The One

This is Salafism, not Monism.

>>14970253
That's incorrect.
The One is the Mone of all (One-all), the Proodos of All (All-one), and the Apostrophe of All (the unity of all). There's still the all in themselves, the triad is more like the pre-existence of all things in an Ineffable way. Also the One and the Ineffable are beyond difference thus they are One through perfect Love.

>>14970185
I honestly feel violated knowing that I was once a christian. Thank you nietzsche for completely destroying that slave religion

>>14975113
>Thank you nietzsche
forever a slave

Christianity some dumb shit by the looks of it
Praise allah

>>14974477
That's exactly what Damascius resolves, but thread OP misinterprets him. Plotinus even says the same thing Damascius says in how the One prefigures the many.

>>14970185
just because some Christians were baddies does not mean that we all are. Plenty of us like art and thinky-thinky stuff. How could we be against what God is for seeing that he is both an artist and a genius? Everything that is good comes from God. That's how I know that to some degree all the religions come from God. I don't think God is done revealing. We should be working on progressing and uniting all that God has given us.

>>14970699
Yes, Saul was very anti-christian. So much in fact, that this Jew contributed to the creating of Christian doctrine!
Weren't the first Christians Jews? Wasn't Jesus supposed to be the Jewish Messiah? It's almost as if Christianity is the bastard child of Judaism. Very European, fren.

>>14974380
So this is the holy trinity Christians were talking about.

>>14970897
>There’s only zero evidence for the people who don’t seek yahweh. Even if there weren’t evidence, and it were equally irrational to believe or not believe, then it is still true that this life is meaningless, and so by preparing for the afterlife, we stand to benefit if it exists. By loving yahweh and purging yourself of sin and love of this world can you do that.

>>14975412
no one really says Yahweh anymore, the name Jesus Christ is the name above all.

>>14975427
I prefer the term God because it's such a simple and wonderful word. Or yah. I love the simple names, easier to repeat as a mantra. I might have to start using "gu" since it's shorter than "god". Using the name Jesus reduces my perception of God as a transcendental personality too much. Though I'm always thankful for what Jesus has done and said. Knowing God in the Holy Spirit opens up a lot.

>>14974477
Damascius claims the third henad (Unified) is the first manifestation of potential multiplicity. It is single when it functions in relation to The One and multiple when in relation to Being (also called the origin of Life). Reading further ahead he lays down his contrived discourse: The first principle (monad or One in All) participates in The Ineffable One singular, the second principle (first of the two monads or All In One) introduces differentiation, while the third introduces apparent multiplicity which doesn't become true multiplicity until it descends into the Intelligible World. All of the Three principles participate into The One by virtue of their nature and form the triad you're talking about.

>>14975427
The point is that when it's pointed out that you worship the Jewish tribal deity, instead of calling your deity "god", it makes you look more like what you really are: Jewish cultists.

>>14975663
jews were used as a vehicle for his manifestation on earth, we have no problem with any tribe or race as Christians, we have a new covenant with God, unfortunately jews hated Christ, killed him, and then created their own talmudic religion which blasphemes him, so they're kinda screwed.

>>14975663
Most people don't have a very good conception of how God reveals himself to the peoples of the world. God's revelation is dependent upon men's reception and perception. You're purely historical understanding of yhvh probably already metaphysically assumes materialism. It rejects higher realities influencing this one. It denies spiritual experience and revelation.

>>14975735
>spiritual experience and revelation
Hebrew revelation denies this. According to the Bible only jews have received revelation and that any spiritual experience among Gentiles, no matter how nice, have been from demons. Like the prophetic woman in Acts who even said Paul was the messenger of the One true God, it was still and evil demon.

>>14975807
One of the Jews biggest Idols was their own Nation. The symbol of Paul and that woman with a python spirit has to do with believers that have an outward appearance of belief but that do not really understand their own faith. She was literally trying to make money for her Masters, not Proclaim god. What do I care if some people that love their Nation more than God try to say that their nation is so great that God only loves them? Jesus disproved that. What do I care if the exoteric aspects of different religions reject each other? I only care about the pure Divine wisdom and love.

>>14970629
>cucked out of the divine essence

>>14970185
>his "God" cannot enter into a fully human mode of being without compromising his divinity
>his "God" is scared of admitting any multiplicity without splitting himself into parts

>>14974615
>to designate the same thing
They do not ''designate'' the Divine Essence. You're confusing essence with hypostasis like all idol-worshippers do.

>>14976049
idol-worship is myth
literally no major religion in history has ever literally worshipped "idols", they're basically or absolutely the same as icons.

>>14976072
>idol-worship is myth
>literally no major religion in history has ever literally worshipped "idols", they're basically or absolutely the same as icons.

>>14970684
There is no God without mystery, if you could reconcile in your feeble mind everything about God, you would not be talking about God, but of its image, at best distorted.

You are asking for rationality even if you don't know in which element the process of ratio takes place and you have no means of examining it without retorting to circularity.

>>14976102
That's exactly what the neoplatonists imply you moron. The One is just an approximate view of what created the universe.

>>14976077
>For divinity indeed, the father and fabricator of all things, is more ancient than the sun and the heavens, more excellent than time and eternity, and every flowing nature, and is a legislator without law, ineffable by voice, and invisible by the eyes. Not being able,however, to comprehend his essence, we apply for assistance to words and names, to animals, and figures of gold and ivory and silver, to plants and rivers, to the summits of mountains, and to streams of water; desiring indeed to understand his nature, but through imbecility calling him by the names of such things as appear to us to be beautiful. And in thus acting, we are affected in the same manner as lovers, who are delighted with surveying the images of the objects of their love, and with recollecting the lyre, the dart, and the seat of these, the circus in which they ran, and every thing in short, which excites the memory of the beloved object. What then remains for me to investigate and determine respecting statues? only to admit the subsistence of deity. But if the art of Phidias excites the Greeks to the recollection of divinity, honour to animals the Egyptians, a river others, and fire others, I do not condemn the dissonance: let them only know, let them only love, let them only be mindful of the object they adore.

>>14974615
Not him, and I agree with you on most points except for:
>It's logically impossible for the names 'a', 'b' and 'c' to designate the same thing if a ≠ b, b ≠ c, and a ≠ c.

This is reductive. If these are all undefined expressions, the law of identity breaks down.
X/0 is an undefined expression.
Infinity ^ 0 is an undefined expression.
All logarithms with a negative base are undefined expressions.

Their solutions is exactly the same idea, yet these expressions are not equivalent. Just a minor stipulation. Although the idiot you're arguing against certainly isn't treating the concept of god as an undefined concept.

I have yet to see an atheist make an intelligent post on /lit/.

>>14976267
>I have yet to see an atheist make an intelligent post
ftfy

>if god one, how god also many?

>>14976111
>The One is just an approximate view of what created the universe.
This. Most intelligent pagans weren't so idiotic to claim that they were talking about anything but a weak approximation of the Holy Trinity. It's only the 4channel LARPers who stoop so low even when they have full access to God's direct revelation of Himself.

>>14971427
I don't know, anon. Getting refuted alongside people posting funny pictures played a part in me finally understanding my folly and accepting the truth.

>>14976296
Abrahamic religions aren't the Revelations of God. Pagan neoplatonists already achieved divine illumination before Christianity.

>>14976333
Neoplats became interested in having a practice and religion but couldn't come up with anything substantial, hence it faded away like all false teachings.

>>14976333
>Abrahamic religions aren't the Revelations of God.
This. Christianity is the only true Revelation, not the so-called "Abrahamic" faiths modernist scholars invented as an umbrella term.

>>14976345
Neoplatonism is very much alive

>>14976353
>Christianity is the only true Revelation
All faiths lead to the same end. None of them is the true or false one.

>>14976326
This. If I get corrected, I swallow my pride. Nothing worse than having an ego as an anon.

>>14976375
>All faiths lead to the same end.
Where do you get this false idea from?
>None of them is the true or false one.
But how can this be when all of them lead to the same (presumably "true) end?

>>14976411
All faiths lead to the divine illumination required to seek The One. To claim one is above the other is proselytizing pretentiousness. If you're a christcuck who blindly believes in the babble instead of finding the truth for yourself you're no better than the islamic extremists you loathe and you'll never make it.

>>14976432
>All faiths lead to the divine illumination required to seek The One.
How do you know this? Have you been illuminated already?

>>14976434
Yes, and it wasn't by means of Christianity

>>14976444
Good, now ask The One to share his flawless refutation of Christianity with us to spread the message further.

>>14976432
>claims his perennialist views are above Christianity
>To claim one is above the other is proselytizing pretentiousness

>>14976444
>Yes, and it wasn't by means of Christianity

>>14976470
I did not claim so, i just pointed out the flaws of the trinity and Christianity.
>>14976460
Attributing human qualities to The One is missing completely the point.
>>14976479
>>Yes, and it wasn't by means of Christianity

>>14976511
>Attributing human qualities to The One
No Christian attributes human qualities to the Divine Essence.

>>14976511
>Attributing human qualities to The One is missing completely the point.
>he thinks Christ doesn't have two natures
OH NO NO NO NO

>>14976554
By demanding me that I ask the One you just attributed the speaking faculty to something that is Ineffable.
>>14976580
That's exactly why it's flawed. A divine entity can not steep down to the lowly material world. Your views on faith are a fraud. I suggest you to pore over Plotinus and Damascius (pbuh) works and free yourself from the superstitions of christianity.

I hear a lot of Christian bashing (im all for it desu, but i still value the Bible and Christ because I am literate), but the bashers haven’t identified a positive to replace Christianity with? Don’t be afraid, speak up.

>>14976610
>A divine entity can not steep down to the lowly material world.
Found your false and cringe gnostic assumption.

>>14976610
But aren't you enligthened and united to The One due to your illumination? Why do you not have divine knowledge to immediately refute Christianity once and for all?

>>14976635
It is downright ridiculous that a divine entity would so much as even move let alone speak or influence our world. The One remains immobile in its oneness.

>>14976658
>It is downright ridiculous
Why?

>>14976654
Divine knowledge can not be shared. You can only attain it by reaching the one with your soul.
>>14976664
I already explained that it's because it's the immobile mover. Your reading comprehension is poor as expected from christcuck cattle.

>>14976675
>it's the immobile mover
Why though?

>>14976111
The one is approximating the divine trinity of three personhoods with one will, one substance, one reality.

Fixed it for your feeble imagination.

>>14976684
It's explained in the OP. Movement would make the One imperfect as it would have to depend on something instead of being self-dependent.
>>14976690
The One isn't the trinity but the trinity is The One. The One can not be dependent even on trinity because it's the simplest entity.

>>14976703
>>14976675
>>14976610
>>14976511
reminder
>The All-In One (infinity) is inside The One
>but isn't related to The One at all.
The One is not completely unindigent, not completely transcendent

>>14975326
He contributed as anti-christian? lol
>Weren't the first Christians Jews?
no
>Wasn't Jesus supposed to be the Jewish Messiah?
no, he came to save all, humanity and even the cosmos
> Very European, fren.
All knowledge comes from the east you retard

>>14976895
Yes because The One inglobes everything but not the other way around. The One is perfect in its own subsistence and The three principles are unrelated to it although they participate in it.

>>14974418
Celsus

>>14976924
how can one thing be unrelated but still participate in the very thing unrelated to it?

>>14976934
that's what participation implies

>>14976934
Because the One is everything and is nothing at the same time. Hence it inglobes everything but The Trinity doesn't inglobe The One but only participates in the unity of The One.

>christcucks are inherently against art and intellectuals
Ah, looks like the kike shills are still salty because of the based Giovanni Gasparro https://www.kikebook.com/giovannigasparroart/?hc_ref=ARTf3qHsGbIu0BCADnAU19QPLmu6PFpM2q_IHNDkz405epigJhf-mD4AttRqMx1LZgI&ref=nf_target&__xts__[0]=68.ARDJHITUQ_vsIw2pY4sdtmXowYgyZPInAl5arXKPhXbRPJLNWwEfShMUQfKOAL-jimOyPru4TtUcHdJKam5OcQDwgrGtzgRv5cyK33SjmNs9JBZYkdYtbrRL30leE842lKUedcT9H-AEqO12UppPvgBh__2l8_5Bl53yetN8ffCYNTY8qdNf5CPmwR9BJdlMaJkdcnwlVIHhuzGTRdgrZOWJmWIVj1hLKE9DVA6oSp2g-ovQOt0khtR9gYdaahAu6562RsJLRl-B5viVOA-SedPH5y6c7mryEFqVRIWPYDMvL1teJSSnLzQNA1yVJoiNjiFStbinsFhNqcTY6tCqXq6Vw2ZJuZJj8-VFD0UJfwGQ4jW4uJt8LBcg06ScgpF1FpI2q9SJsCnoLE1_lnbxnDmpKqWdvIZ1ZwlMzupgjJPCBfOfebzehBdonJJQYdxR7w&__tn__=kC-R

>>14976944
>>14976951
but participation does not imply an established relation of priorly unrelated parties?
we participate in the Intellect, we are not Intellect but we participate of it, thus by participation we are related to it.

>Because the One is everything and is nothing at the same time. It englobes everything.
how is this different to pantheism?

>>14976989
>but participation does not imply an established relation of priorly unrelated parties?
No.
>how is this different to pantheism?
Pantheism doesn't explain carefully the origin of the world and attributes a creative quality to the One. The One doesn't create because it doesn't need to create since it is already everything.

>>14977007
>No.
how not? explain please

But then the First Principle is completely unrelated to The One? How is it (one) Principle therefore? How is it even within The One if COMPLETELY UNRELATED? How is it not as absolute as The One?

>>14977050
>But then the First Principle is completely unrelated to The One?
Yes
>How is it (one) Principle therefore? How is it even within The One if COMPLETELY UNRELATED?
The One already has everything in its unity, why would it need to possess the first principle if it has already everything? It's the principles which participate in it, not the opposite.

>if you don't cut the tip of your penis off i'll call you a fedora. jesus is our lord and savior only tranny fedora don't cut their cock for jesus. god needs your foreskin give it to him degenerate

>>14976916
>He contributed as anti-christian? lol
Do you know what sarcasm is? Really puts your whole response into question.

>>14977104
Read the proposition 5 of Proclus' ET.
In the end it says: ''...for plainly, this One cannot be many, or we have infinite regress. It is then the One itself; and from the One itself manifold proceeds''.
Unities are as such due to their being conditioned by the One itself. They are not completely unrelated.

Prop. 8. All that participates in the Good is subordinate to the primal Good.
Being-Life-Intellect. We participate of it. Matter participate of it (Being).
Prop. 11.
etc
you're not explaining how there is participation and at the same time no relation at all.

>>14977136
but he was anti-christian
what is even your point? stop dodging

>>14975241
so Damascius is actually compatible with Christian or Eastern Orthodox? metaphyiscs

>>14977198
Apparently you didn't understand. I referred to Paul the Apostle (Saul of Tarsus).

>>14977238
i know you referred to paul, he was anti-christian. what is your point?

>>14977254
How was he anti-christian? He was anti-christian before conversion and then preached that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah.

>>14977287
he was a pharisee (anti-christian) before the conversion, yes. Where did he preach that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah? He was the Saviour of ALL.

>>14977186
>you're not explaining how there is participation and at the same time no relation at all.
Proclus made the dyad equal to the One, which is plainly wrong. The One is itself, it doesn't need anything else. It's the triad which participates willingly in The One, while leaving The One unchanged. There's no need for the triad to participate either, The One is subsistent on its own. The Manifold participates from The Being, the Third Principle, which gains the potential multiplicity after the differentiation of the First and Second Principle. To say that from The One proceeds the manifold is to make it a fallible entity. Look up Damascius' work, he also points out another kind of Triad which is the same as the three principles: staying, procession and reversion. The first principle stays in itself, the second and the second introduces difference, and the third multiplicity when it functions as Being. The dyad has a double function but it's still unrelated to the One because The One comes before them.

>Holy Trinity
based.
>pagan philosophy
cringe.

>>14976703
You are playing semantics. God cannot be comprehended by mere rationality. He can be experienced via apocalypsis and enosis.

God is simple and infinite in complexity at the same time. He is immovable and moves at infinite speed.

In your effort to comprehend God via abstraction you are falling in a trap. God is a person not a force of nature, though he can command it. Your description of God is meta-atheism, God is not subservient to anything, abstractions are models to help us, they are not perfect in their simplicity but rather erroneous in their infinite extrapolation.

There is no straight line, there is no zero temperature, there is no emptiness. Those are approximations.

bump

>>14977230
Not until Christians start understanding that ontological causality isn't time bound.
You say that the son proceeds from the father, this literally means that the father causes the son, and is therefore superior to the son. Then you'll have to decide whether this emanation is a necessary causation or a freely willed one. I presume it has to be a necessary act of the Father's Hypostasis, but this makes the father himself a super-essential one, where he and is his nature are the same without distinction. I believe Pseudo-Dionysius says the father and godhead are identical.
Also, the Son and Spirit do not participate in their own emanation, therefore they do not share everything the father has or is—but this contradicts the father being the same as the godhead, so he must be even superessential of this, making the godhead a tertiary impersonal being that unites the trinity under one external act (everything external of the trinity is done as a whole by the trinity, thus they are One in all external acts as a triad). But thus doesn't undo the fact that the father is the Hyparxis of the trinity avd its godhead, in a way he's the godhead of a triad of two Hypostases and one Impersonal Hypostasis, or the Monad of these; or he's the Monad of the Dyad of the Son and Spirit; or he's beyond the difference between Object and Subject and is both the nature of himself and the trinity yet the nature and the son/spirit are suspended from him. Either way, the Father is [internally] greater than the son and spirit and his nature.

>>14970253
>distinction is division
no lol

>>14974164
>>multiplicty means inherent imperfection
>lmao
>Based on what? So a God who has more than 1 property is imperfect?
OP completely BTFO

christianity some stupid shit

>>14976077
He's right. "idol worship" is just Abrahamic rhetoric and contained within its definition is "out group". Only "the other" can perform idolatry whereas whatever "we" do will never be idolatry because that would be literally definitionally impossible.

>>14970634
I don't understand the virgin birth thing. Iirc. the bible tries to tie Jesus into David's bloodline both on Mary's side and Joseph's side. Obviously if it were a virgin birth then Joseph's side wouldn't matter. But at that time I believe lineage was considered dependent on the father's side so I guess they have to include Joseph's ancestors for Jesus to actually be considered a relative to David?

>>14981825
Why not? Most scientists would say that distinction is division.

>>14981855
>whatever "we" do will never be idolatry because that would be literally definitionally impossible
This but unironically. Anyone worshipping idols is immediately excluded from the group by that very fact.

>>14981913
>worshipping idols
historical citation needed

>>14981926
>historical citation needed
Just take a trip to India. The guys literally pray to cows, monkeys, snakes, etc. It's some weird shit.

>>14981926
Any religion worshipping false gods.
So Islamism, Judaism, Nestorianism, Arianism, Zeusism, Odinism, Marsism, Platonism, Neo-platonism, Vishnuism, Shivaism, Krishnaism, Kaliism, Shintoism, Buddhism...
The list goes on...

>>14981911
>Most scientists would say

>>14981941
>>14976116
Of statues however, there is neither one law, nor one mode, nor one art, nor one matter.

For the Greeks think it fit to honour the Gods from things the most beautiful in the earth, from a pure matter, the human form, and accurate art: and their opinion is not irrational who fashion statues in the human resemblance. For if the human soul is most near and most similar to divinity, it is not reasonable to suppose that divinity would invest that which is most similar to himself with a most deformed body, but rather with one which would be an easy vehicle to immortal souls, light, and adapted to motion. For this alone, of all the bodies on the earth, raises its summit on high, is magnificent, superb, and full of symmetry, neither astonishing through its magnitude, nor terrible through its strength, nor moved with difficulty through its weight, nor slippery through its smoothness, nor repercussive through its hardness, nor groveling through its coldness, nor precipitate through its heat, nor inclined to swim through its laxity, nor feeding on raw flesh through its ferocity, nor on grass through its imbecility; but is harmonically composed for its proper works, and is dreadful to timid animals, but mild to such as are brave. It is also adapted to walk by nature, but winged by reason, capable of swimming by art, feeds on corn and fruits, and cultivates the earth, is of a good colour, stands firm, has a pleasing countenance, and a graceful beard. In the resemblance of such a body, the Greeks think fit to honour the Gods."

>>14981985
He then observes, "that with respect to the Barbarians, all of them in like manner admit the subsistence of divinity, but different nations among these adopt different symbols."

After which he adds, "O many and allvarious statues! of which some are fashioned by art, and others are embraced through indigence: some are honoured through utility, and others are venerated through the astonishment which they excite; some are considered as divine through their magnitude, and others are celebrated for their beauty! There is not indeed any race of men, neither Barbarian nor Grecian, neither maritime nor continental, neither living a pastoral life, nor dwelling in cities, which can endure to be without some symbols of the honour of the Gods. How, therefore, shall any one discuss the question whether it is proper that statues of the Gods should be fabricated or not?

For if we were to give laws to other men recently sprung from the earth, and dwelling beyond our boundaries and our air, or who were fashioned by a certain Prometheus, ignorant of life, and law, and reason, it might perhaps demand consideration, whether this race should be permitted to adore these spontaneous statues alone, which are not fashioned from ivory or gold, and which are neither oaks nor cedars, nor rivers, nor birds, but the rising sun, the splendid moon, the variegated heaven, the earth itself and the air, all fire and all water;

or shall we constrain these men also to the necessity of honouring wood, or stones or images? If, however, this is the common law of all men, let us make no innovations, let us admit the conceptions concerning the Gods, and preserve their symbols as well as their names.

>>14970185
>Daily reminder that christcucks are inherently against art and intellectuals and should be shot down on the spot
You misspelled conservatoids

>>14981985
This leads into >>14976116

>>14981987
This is before
>>14976116

>>14981985
>>14981987
>praying to a statue
Omg this! Kill your Self man. Meditate. We are NPCs.

>>14981913
The group CAN'T worship idols. It's impossible. Anything they worship will not be idols.

Idolatry is an Abrahamic meme.