pro_universal's reasons for leavin the Catholic Church

[Prometheus1974]

The difference is that the history is juxtaposed. When Muslims had religious government, their society was the most tolerant of religious diversity of the two.

I am afraid that there are about 60 million Hindu victims of Muslim genocide during the conquest and subsequent occupation of India who would disagree with you. Islam is probably the worst example you could have chosen for a religion that was tolerant of others.

When Christians had religious government, they fought endless wars over orthodoxy.

I’m not entirely sure what you mean by religious government. If you mean government by Christians, I think you will find that most of the major world leaders in the west still consider themselves Christian. I think you will also find that the political systems of most western nations are based solidly on Christian principles, which has given rise to the culture of peace and tolerance which we enjoy in the west and which is unequalled in other parts of the world. If you mean direct government by a religious figure, the only state that qualifies is the Vatican, which hasn’t been at war for a very long time. Unlike say Iran. And of course Shia and Sunni Muslims who continue to live in peace and harmony throughout the world

Now that Christianity does not govern anywhere, the religious wars are over.

Except between Shia and Sunni. And between Jihadists and eveybody else they don’t like. And who is causing all that trouble in Darfur?

Now that Islamic governments have collapsed to be replaced by secularists, there is war in the Muslim world.

Weren’t Iran and Iraq at war a little while back? Wasn’t Ayatollah Khomeni in charge of Iran? Was he secularist?

One society only found peace by giving up religious authority. The other found war by giving up religious authority. What does that tell you about the religions?

It tells me that you have some very strong opinions, but are very selective in assembling fact to support them.

It sounds to me that you are a Muslim apologist rather than a dissenting or discerning Catholic - fair enough and I apologize if I have assessed you unfairly. I base this simply on the fact that if it is violence and intolerance that are your principal objections, you seem to have turned towards the one religion that is least suited to compare to Catholicism in those categories.

 

[Image_of_God]

thx strange how heresies are coming back again against the Church…but what the heck, gates of hell will not stop the Church…shame on people who do not learn from their Fathers who knew their faith much better…

I agree. The Fathers meditated on scripture and can be trusted. I hope God prevents this type of heresy from coming back. M_Oliver’s claim was that Jesus was created is completely contradictory, it is an Aryan belief that was rejected by the Church. For if nothing can be created without Christ, then even Christ could not be created without himself and that is the main reason that a belief like that lacks correct reason. Besides,I just wanted to give Oliver a fraternal correction and I was not trying to be mean.

 

[Image_of_God]

Post #86 explains with Scripture.

Sorry, it is just that one of your posts said that Jesus is not part of the “one God”…(THIS IS NOT SARCASM), I have considered your quotes, and most of them are correct towards his human nature, but not his divine. You still have not considered my qoutes yet, because they explain everything.

 

[tequilamac]

I’m taking this from someone else, but I can’t remember where I saw the formulation exactly like this:

1. God is Jesus
2. God is the Father
3. God is the Holy Spirit
4. Jesus is not the Father
5. Jesus is not the Holy Spirit
6. The Father is not Jesus
7. The Father is not the Holy Spirit
8. The Holy Spirit is not Jesus
9. The Holy Spirit is not the Father
10. There is only one God.

If there’s a way to get a more textbook example of a contradiction, I’d like to see it.

Your formulation is accurate but I don’t see the contradiction. Where is it? there is only one Godhead but that Godhead has three distinct persons all of whom are God. I think you are confused because you are trying to reason it out as if the Godhead was a material entity. God has no material substance, you know. Perhaps that is why it is difficult for you. In Islam and Judaism, one finds the same problem trying to grasp the Trinity. Because they try to picture it in physically human and material substance terms and it is not successfully accomplished.

 

[M_Oliver]

Sorry, it is just that one of your posts said that Jesus is not part of the “one God”…(THIS IS NOT SARCASM), I have considered your quotes, and most of them are correct towards his human nature, but not his divine. You still have not considered my qoutes yet, because they explain everything.

Be specific when you say I said that Jesus Christ is not part of the ONE GOD and I left out His divine nature.

I don’t recall any quotes from you that explain everything on this subject. Perhaps you could please refresh my memory.

 

[inJESUS]

But the Trinity isn’t reducible a formula. If by the formula you mean “one substance, three persons,” this was hammered out over centuries with all kinds of qualifications and redefinitions. The very terms “person” and “substance” took on new meanings in the course of the debates.

I don’t know how on earth you can claim that “one substance, three persons” is contradictory. You can claim that it’s sheer obfuscation, but it isn’t contradictory, because the terms of the formula were developed precisely to describe the reality with which early Christians believed themselves to be confronted. It’s not that Christians invented the formula based on terms that had a clear but contradictory meaning and then developed elaborate doctrines in order to justify the contradiction, which is what you seem to be saying.

Edwin

God knows i love your posts !

 

[tequilamac]

Be specific when you say I said that Jesus Christ is not part of the ONE GOD and I left out His divine nature.

I don’t recall any quotes from you that explain everything on this subject. Perhaps you could please refresh my memory.

Post 76. I am answering for Image of God because I noticed it too. I was going to ignore it as it has nothing to do with Catholic teaching or any mainstream Christian religion of a Trinitarian nature. It does resemble however, more of the SDA and JW bent in their concept of Christ. But it is not Catholic and it is the Catholic Church pro universal was arguing about, so I am not sure what your point is anyway.

 

[Image_of_God]

Scripture says, and this is an accurate translation, that…

Who {Jesus Christ} is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: (Colossians 1:15)
Sorry, but this is an incorrect interpretation of what Paul meant. Just as every human being is made in the image of God, so is Jesus’, since he had a human nature. This shows he was fully human.

"Blessed be the God and Father OF

In this case your post is contradictory. And from as far as I see it, I have not misunderstood a thing. Before, you said that Jesus was unequal to the “one God the Father.” If I’m not correct, God is the only one to be worshiped and from your post, you are saying that there are two different gods, one lower than the other.
Either, you are admiting that Jesus, the Son is equal with the Father and he can be worshiped with the Father, or you are saying that Jesus is lower than the Father, concluding that he is made of a different substance, but that they can both be worship, which one?

 

[M_Oliver]

If then nothing could be Created without Christ, how could Christ be created without Himself?

I really find it amazing that you appear to NOT give God the Father any credit in this whole thing. Because of the Father, Jesus Christ exists. If the Father didn’t want Jesus Christ there would be no Jesus Christ.

"…I [Jesus] came OUT from God. I CAME OUT FROM the FATHER…" (John 16:27-28).

Then we conclude that Christ cannot have been created because He Himself could not be created without Himself. Without Himself, Nothing can be created.

Completely unScriptural…

"…I [Jesus] came OUT from God. I CAME OUT FROM the FATHER…" (John 16:27-28).

And after Jesus Christ came OUT from the Father, ALL ELSE came THROUGH Jesus Christ:

"Who [Jesus Christ] is the Image of the invisible God, Firstborn of every creature, for in Him is ALL CREATED, that in the heavens and that on the earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or lordships, or sovereignties, or authorities, all is created THROUGH Him and FOR Him, and He is BEFORE all, and all has its cohesion in Him" (Col. 1:14-17).

 

[M_Oliver]

Post 76. I am answering for Image of God because I noticed it too. I was going to ignore it as it has nothing to do with Catholic teaching or any mainstream Christian religion of a Trinitarian nature. It does resemble however, more of the SDA and JW bent in their concept of Christ. But it is not Catholic and it is the Catholic Church pro universal was arguing about, so I am not sure what your point is anyway.

Your reluctance to be specific makes me think you have a disagreement with a Scripture that I posted…

Point it out.

 

[Prometheus1974]

1. God is Jesus
2. God is the Father
3. God is the Holy Spirit
4. Jesus is not the Father
5. Jesus is not the Holy Spirit
6. The Father is not Jesus
7. The Father is not the Holy Spirit
8. The Holy Spirit is not Jesus
9. The Holy Spirit is not the Father
10. There is only one God.

If there’s a way to get a more textbook example of a contradiction, I’d like to see it.

Should be:

1. God is the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit
2. Jesus is God
3. the Father is God
4. the Holy Spirit is God
5. Jesus is not the Father
6. Jesus is not the Holy Spirit
7. The Father is not Jesus
8. The Father is not the Holy Spirit
9. The Holy Spirit is not Jesus
10. The Holy Spirit is not the Father
11. There is only one God.

Then you have

1. H2O is water, ice and steam
2. Water is H2O
3. Ice is H2O
4. Steam is H2O
5. Water is not ice
6. Water is not steam
7. Ice is not water
8. Ice is not steam.
9. Steam is not ice.
10. Steam is not water.
11. There is only one H2O

No contradiction.

 

[M_Oliver]

Sorry, but this is an incorrect interpretation of what Paul meant. Just as every human being is made in the image of God, so is Jesus’, since he had a human nature. This shows he was fully human.

If anyone believes that every human being “is made” in the image of God then they are decieved. If every human being was made in the image of God no human being could sin. To say that every human being is made in the image of God but still sins is a GROSS misinterpretation of Scripture. I do not teach that. Who does?

No one has argued against this, because this is a fact, taught by the Catholic Church…God the Father, God the Son(Jesus), God the Holy Spirit. She teaches that Jesus comes from the Father, but he was born infintely from him.

Show me the Scripture that says “God the Holy Spirit”. There is not a single one. Yes, I understand that your church teaches that 1 plus 1 plus 1 equals 1 while you simultaneously teach the trinity{3}. Weird math .

No, it does not, it is your misinterpretation of the Scriptures that has lead you to believe this. Scripture clearly says that Jesus is equal to the Father in these passages:

John 5:18
For this reason the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because he was not only breaking the sabbath, but was also calling God his own Father, thereby making himself equal to God.

One big problem buddy. The word translated “equal” is most accurately translated as “similar”. Big difference.

The Bible does support the equality between the Father and the Son, your interpretations have lead you to believe otherwise. Another thing, no one said that Jesus was above the Father, we only said they are equal.

My interpretations? You have no clue as to what is going on here do you? A reminder…

Jesus Christ said,

“…I am going to the Father, for the Father is GREATER than I” (John 14:28).

"Now I want you to be aware that the Head of every man is Christ, yet the head of the woman is the man, yet the Head of Christ IS GOD" (I Cor. 11:3).

Does that sound like Christ thought he was EQUAL to the Father? Did Paul teach that Christ was equal to the Father? Look it up for yourself, don’t give me church talking points.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

pro, water can be three things. it can be ice, steam, or liquid. a three leaf clover cannot be a three leaf clover without three leaves. rip off one leaf of a three leaf clover and it isn’t a three leafed clover anymore. where is the contradiction in the Blessed Trinity?

The Father is the source of the Godhead but is not the ‘first’ member of the Godhead. The Son is eternally begotten of the Father. He is the Word, or the Logos. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. Where is the contradiction?

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

If anyone believes that every human being “is made” in the image of God then they are decieved. If every human being was made in the image of God no human being could sin. To say that every human being is made in the image of God but still sins is a GROSS misinterpretation of Scripture. I do not teach that. Who does?

M_Oliver:

Show me the Scripture that says “God the Holy Spirit”. There is not a single one. Yes, I understand that your church teaches that 1 plus 1 plus 1 equals 1 while you simultaneously teach the trinity{3}. Weird math .

This is an easy one to refute here. Tell me which Person of the Blessed Trinity blasphemy is not forgiven against??? Hmm??? Is it the Holy Spirit? Yes! ONLY blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is unforgivable because IT IS REJECTION OF SALVATION AND THE RESURRECTION.

M_Oliver:

My interpretations? You have no clue as to what is going on here do you? A reminder…

Yes, your flawed interpretations. But no one can blame you, unless you continue to reject the Truth after having been presented it because your interpretation is outside the Church which Jesus Christ founded.

Jesus Christ said,

“…I am going to the Father, for the Father is GREATER than I” (John 14:28).

"Now I want you to be aware that the Head of every man is Christ, yet the head of the woman is the man, yet the Head of Christ IS GOD" (I Cor. 11:3).

Does that sound like Christ thought he was EQUAL to the Father? Did Paul teach that Christ was equal to the Father? Look it up for yourself, don’t give me church talking points.

You fail to mention where Jesus Christ says “I and the Father are One.” He did not mean one spirtually, He meant one in Being. I think that pro is being a lot more truthful about this than you are. At least he is leaving Christianity altogether, whereas you grasp at straws to support your centuries old heresy and continue to call yourself Christian while rejecting one of the basic tenants of the Faith. Arians usually only cling to a few passages of Scripture, while ignoring anything else which points to Jesus’ divinity. In the Apocalypse, Jesus calls Himself the Alpha and the Omega. Jesus also calls Himself the “I Am”. Jesus has the power to forgive sins, and in the Old Covenant only God had the power to forgive sins. Get a grip, bro! The reason the Jews had Jesus crucified is specifically because He claimed to be God AND the Messiah. There were many other claimants at the time who claimed to be the Messiah as well, but none claimed to be the Messiah AND God. For instance, the Apostle Thomas calls Jesus Christ “My Lord and MY GOD” and bows down to worship Jesus. Jesus does not correct him. In Mat 12:8 He calls Himself the “Lord of the Sabbath” which means He created the Sabbath. In Luke 8:39, Luke tells that Jesus said “tell how much God has done for you” and he continues to say what Jesus has done for him. In Jn 5:21-22 Jesus again claims to be God, by saying it is He who gives life and says that all judgment has been given to Him by the Father. In Jn 1:1, we see that Jesus created the world. In Jn 8:19 Jesus says “if you knew me, you would know my Father also.” In John 8:12 Jesus says He is the light of the world and in 1 John 1:5 God the Father is the light of the world and in him there is no darkness. In Jn 8:23 Jesus says that He is not of the world and only God is not of the world. In Jn 10:18 Jesus says that He has the power to lay down His life and raise it up again. Only God has this power in Gal. 1:1. In Jn 13:13 Jesus says, “You call me Teacher and Lord and you are right for so I AM”, again using the name of God as His own. In Jn 16:15 Jesus says “all things that the Father has are Mine.” Jesus has EVERYTHING the Father has which makes Him God Almighty. The Old Testament book of Isaiah calls the Messiah the EVERLASTING FATHER, THE PRINCE OF PEACE AND THE MIGHTY GOD. Jn 17:5-24 Jesus’ desire is for us to behold His glory which He had before the foundation of the world. Mat 28:20 Jesus said He would be with us always, even unto the end of the world. Only God is Omnipresent and Omnipotent, and Jesus ascribes these qualities of Himself. Mat 18:20 Jesus says that wherever two or three are gathered in His name, there He is in the midst of them. Only God is Omnipresent and Omnipotent. Numerous times does Jesus Christ make Himself equal to God when he says “You have heard it said… but I say unto you…” (examples are Mat 5:21-22; 27-28; 31-32; 33-34; 38-39; 43-44). Anymore???

 

[ferdie]

If anyone believes that every human being “is made” in the image of God then they are decieved. If every human being was made in the image of God no human being could sin. To say that every human being is made in the image of God but still sins is a GROSS misinterpretation of Scripture. I do not teach that. Who does?

Show me the Scripture that says “God the Holy Spirit”. There is not a single one. Yes, I understand that your church teaches that 1 plus 1 plus 1 equals 1 while you simultaneously teach the trinity{3}. Weird math .

Jesus Christ said,

“…I am going to the Father, for the Father is GREATER than I” (John 14:28).

"Now I want you to be aware that the Head of every man is Christ, yet the head of the woman is the man, yet the Head of Christ IS GOD" (I Cor. 11:3).

Does that sound like Christ thought he was EQUAL to the Father? Did Paul teach that Christ was equal to the Father? Look it up for yourself, don’t give me church talking points.

Pro, do some more research on what catholics mean when we say “every human being is made in the Image of God”

Also we don’t use, 1+1+1=1, we use 1x1x1=1.

And also another thing you might want to harmonize the bible instead of pitting one verse against another. Try reading about Jesus divinity in Jn, Tit, Col, etc.

 

[tequilamac]

Your reluctance to be specific makes me think you have a disagreement with a Scripture that I posted…

Point it out.

Actually I will be specific and yes I have a problem with scripture translations that occurred in the 1500’s. I like the original translations as they are accurate. This is why I do not use the King James or the other Protestant Bibles.
Secondly- your statement has nothing to do with Catholicism. I do not know how much more specific I can be. Your view of God is absolute heresy from the point of view of Catholicism and even a very, very old and tired heresy as well. So I do not know how much more specific I can be. I understand you are using an off translation, and this is where you are getting your info. I also understand that you are not Catholic. Having said that, I don’t know how to make it more clear for you. You said

"How many Gods are there? Answer: “ONE God.”

Of Whom is this ONE God composed? Answer: “the FATHER.”

NOT, the Father, AND the Son, AND the holy ghost. Just, “the Father.” ONLY, “the Father.” “ONE God, the FATHER.”

Is not God’s definition far easier and better than the theologians’ “one, plus ONE, plus ONE, equals ONE”?

Is Jesus Christ an equal part of this “ONE God?” NO, He is not. Let God’s Word tell us. We don’t need to speculate and theorize. Here is Who and What Jesus Christ is, He is the “one LORD.” This is not hard. It is only hard for those who wrestle and twist Scripture to their own destruction (II Peter 3:16). John 8:5-6 makes the following very clear:"

This is heretical nonsense. Now am I being specific enough?

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

M_Oliver, I also refer you to St. Augustine of Hippo’s refutation of the Arians (he was much more experienced at it than I).
St. Augustine of Hippo:

1. We have just heard, brethren, these words of the Lord, which He addressed to His disciples: “Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid. Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come unto you: if ye loved me, ye would surely rejoice, because I go unto the Father; for the Father is greater than I.” Their hearts might have become filled with trouble and fear, simply because of His going away from them, even though intending to return; lest, possibly, in the very interval of the shepherd’s absence, the wolf should make an onset on the flock. But as God, He abandoned not those from whom He departed as man: and Christ Himself is at once both man and God. And so He both went away in respect of His visible humanity, and remained as regards His Godhead: He went away as regards the nature which is subject to local limitations, and remained in respect of that which is ubiquitous. Why, then, should their heart be troubled and afraid, when His quitting their eyesight was of such a kind as to leave unaltered His presence in their heart? Although even God, who has no local bounds to His presence, may depart from the hearts of those who turn away from Him, not with their feet, but their moral character; just as He comes to such as turn to Him, not with their faces, but in faith, and approach Him in the spirit, and not in the flesh. But that they might understand that it was only in respect of His human nature that He said, “I go and come to you,” He went on to say, “If ye loved me, ye would surely rejoice, because I go unto the Father; for the Father is greater than I.” And so, then, in that very respect wherein the Son is not equal to the Father, in that was He to go to the Father, just as from Him is He hereafter to come to judge the quick and the dead: while in so far as the Only-begotten is equal to Him that begat, He never withdraws from the Father; but with Him is everywhere perfectly equal in that Godhead which knows of no local limitations. For “being as He was in the form of God,” as the apostle says, “He thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” For how could that nature be robbery, which was His, not by usurpation, but by birth? “But He emptied Himself, taking upon Him the form of a servant;” and so, not losing the former, but assuming the latter, and emptying Himself in that very respect wherein He stood forth before us here in a humbler state than that wherein He still remained with the Father. For there was the accession of a servant-form, with no recession of the divine: in the assumption of the one there was no consumption of the other. In reference to the one He says, “The Father is greater than I;” but because of the other, “I and my Father are one.”

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

St. Augustine of Hippo:

1. Let the Arian attend to this, and find healing in his attention; that wrangling may not lead to vanity, or, what is worse, to insanity. For it is the servant-form which is that wherein the Son of God is less, not only than the Father, but also than the Holy Spirit; and more than that, less also than Himself, for He Himself, in the form of God, is greater than Himself. For the man Christ does not cease to be called the Son of God, a name which was thought worthy of being applied even to His flesh alone as it lay in the tomb. And what else than this do we confess, when we declare that we believe in the only-begotten Son of God, who, under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, and buried? And what of Him was buried, save the flesh without the spirit? And so in believing in the Son of God, who was buried, we surely affix the name, Son of God, even to His flesh, which alone was laid in the grave. Christ Himself, therefore, the Son of God, equal with the Father because in the form of God, inasmuch as He emptied Himself, without losing the form of God, but assuming that of a servant, is greater even than Himself; because the unlost form of God is greater than the assumed form of a servant. And what, then, is there to wonder at, or what is there out of place, if, in reference to this servant-form, the Son of God says, “The Father is greater than I;” and in speaking of the form of God, the self-same Son of God declares, “I and my Father are one”? For one they are, inasmuch as “The Word was God;” and greater is the Father, inasmuch as “the Word was made flesh.” Let me add what cannot be gainsaid by Arians and Eunomians: in respect of this servant-form, Christ as a child was inferior also to His own parents, when, according to Scripture, “He was subject” as an infant to His seniors. Why, then, heretic, seeing that Christ is both God and man, when He speaketh as man, dost thou calumniate God? He in His own person commends our human nature; dost thou dare in Him to asperse the divine? Unbelieving and ungrateful as thou art, wilt thou degrade Him who made thee, just for the very reason that He is declaring what He became because of thee? For equal as He is with the Father, the Son, by whom man was made, became man, in order to be less than the Father: and had He not done so, what would have become of man?

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

St. Augustine of Hippo:

1. May our Lord and Master bring home clearly to our minds the words, “If ye loved me, ye would surely rejoice, because I go unto the Father; for the Father is greater than I.” Let us, along with the disciples, listen to the Teacher’s words, and not, with strangers, give heed to the wiles of the deceiver. Let us acknowledge the twofold substance of Christ; to wit, the divine, in which he is equal with the Father, and the human, in respect to which the Father is greater. And yet at the same time both are not two, for Christ is one; and God is not a quaternity, but a Trinity. For as the rational soul and the body form but one man, so Christ, while both God and man, is one; and thus Christ is God, a rational soul, and a body. In all of these we confess Him to be Christ, we confess Him in each. Who, then, is He that made the world? Christ Jesus, but in the form of God. Who is it that was crucified under Pontius Pilate? Christ Jesus, but in the form of a servant. And so of the several parts whereof He consists as man. Who is He who was not left in hell? Christ Jesus, but only in respect of His soul. Who was to rise on the third day, after being laid in the tomb? Christ Jesus, but solely in reference to His flesh. In reference, then, to each of these, He is likewise called Christ And yet all of them are not two, or three, but one Christ. On this account, therefore, did He say, “If ye loved me, ye would surely rejoice, because I go unto the Father;” for human nature is worthy of congratulation, in being so assumed by the only-begotten Word as to be constituted immortal in heaven, and, earthy in its nature, to be so sublimated and exalted, that, as incorruptible dust, it might take its seat at the right hand of the Father. In such a sense it is that He said He would go to the Father. For in very truth He went unto Him, who was always with Him. But His going unto Him and departing from us were neither more nor less than His transforming and immortalizing that which He had taken upon Him from us in its mortal condition, and exalting that to heaven, by means of which He lived on earth in man’s behalf. And who would not draw rejoicing from such a source, who has such love to Christ that he can at once congratulate his own nature as already immortal in Christ, and cherish the hope that he himself will yet become so through Christ?

newadvent.org/fathers/1701078.htm

 

[pro_universal]

I don’t know how on earth you can claim that “one substance, three persons” is contradictory.

If that were all we know of it, I couldn’t. Neither person nor substance would have any definitions you could work with to either understand the doctrine or assess its coherence.

But that’s not all there is. The list I quoted is straight out of the Athanasian creed, and are accepted as statements a Catholic can make with confidence about the trinity.

If you think the only honest explanation of the trinity is “one God, three persons”, I’d be happy to see you tell me which points on my list are going too far to be supported by trinitarian teaching. If you can’t say things like “Jesus is wholly God”, it’s hard for me to see how a Christian can give any answer to a question, any question, about Jesus or any other person besides “three persons one God.”

For example: “Is the Holy Spirit fully God?”

Answer: “I don’t know, I just know God is three persons and one substance.”

But if you go beyond that, you will end up with precisely the contradictory formula I posed above.

Since it’s in the athanasian creed, I think it’s entirely fair that I use statements beyond “three persons, one substance” to represent the doctrine.

You can claim that it’s sheer obfuscation, but it isn’t contradictory, because the terms of the formula were developed precisely to describe the reality with which early Christians believed themselves to be confronted. It’s not that Christians invented the formula based on terms that had a clear but contradictory meaning and then developed elaborate doctrines in order to justify the contradiction, which is what you seem to be saying.

Edwin

The problem is that the reality with which early Christians were confronted was itself contradictory. They were Jews coming from a religion where any image of God and any suggestion that he was material was blasphemy. Yet, they decided that their leader, a man, was God. The roots are contradictory, and the trinity grew up to reconcile those two opposing beliefs…namely the Jewish invisible God with the belief that Jesus the man was himself God.