• Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Technically what you linked is that god the father and son are separate beings, one who followed from the former

        It’s more a mistake of understanding during the process of codifying orthodoxy than related to what Jesus himself said

      • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, the Holy Trinity is necessarily part of all forms of Christianity. But Jesus never explicitly spelled it out. It was decided long after he died.

        • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not all forms, just all nicean forms, which comprises all the denominations most people care about, but what some folks consider offshoot christian religions like Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons don’t ascribe to it for various reasons.

          • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            My understanding is that it isn’t considered Christian if it doesn’t accept the Trinity. JW and LDS are considered Abrahamic but not Christian per se.

            • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              That’s a definition understood by nicean christians as the nicean creed was basically developed in a trial to say who is and isn’t christian and exile the not christians who wouldn’t cooperate

              Academically I don’t think there is universal agreement on if that standard should be taken at face value.

    • Dicska@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I like your way of thinking but for a Christian it doesn’t work like that. They will likely say that despite God’s intentions, this person went consciously against God’s will and decided to commit a sin (because God gave us free will).

      And then good luck explaining to them how nobody in their right mind would want to be ridiculed, cast out, ostracised, hated by so many people and become trans just simply out of spite.

    • EmptySlime@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Moreover, by their own stories not only did God intentionally make that person trans but God likely deliberately did so to test the people interacting with said trans person on if they could love the trans person as required by their faith.

      But no. It’s never that because the religious argument is just a post hoc justification for the hate.

      • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’re not real mistakes. The end justifies the means and they think their god is only smart enough to go with this, basically.

        • Imotali@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          The ends justify the means?

          Hypotheticaly then: if I had a 100% guarantee that murdering all babies would get them into heaven, but you’d go to hell, is it morally right to murder all babies? The ends justify the means, do they not? We need to get babies to heaven! So murder them all!

          No, it’s absolutely still monstrous. Because utilitarianism is stupid.

          • Scrof@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Stanislaw Lem had a short story about something like this. Basically a missionary came to a planet populated by cute innocent fur balls. He taught them the Bible, so they tortured him to death to make him a martyr and guarantee that he gets to haven, knowingly condemning themselves to hell out of compassion for the priest.

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not for nothing, but like for the first thousand years of Christianity they basically murdered each other over the question.

  • kromem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Meanwhile apocryphal Jesus was like:

    Jesus said to them, “When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the kingdom].”

    • Gospel of Thomas saying 22

    Or

    For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven.

    • Gospel of Thomas saying 114 (likely a much later addition to the text reflecting later air of misogyny, but still)
  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Think of it as God in different parts of the same show,

    God the Incarnate, Jesus, God the Creator, the big G everyone thinks of, and God the All Seeing, The Holy Spirit.

    One actor, many masks.

    • The Dark Lord ☑️@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even this would be considered heresy by the Church. The idea of the Trinity is that all 3 can exist at the same time, but they’re still the same person. Not just masks, but 3 literally different people, but also the same person.

      • birthday_attack@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        In my fundamentalist upbringing, people would bring up the “divine mystery” of the Trinity as a kind of proof of the truth of Christianity. As in, the fact that the Trinity cannot be explained must mean that it is beyond our human comprehension, and if it’s beyond our comprehension, it must be divine.

        But like, it’s very easy to see how humans could create the idea of the Trinity, since it’s simply asserting that multiple contradictory things are all true at the same time. Is God the Father separate from Jesus His son, or one and the same? Both, actually!

        Plus, zealots in the church loved "uhm akshully"ing anyone who tried to use a metaphor to explain the Trinity. “The Trinity is like… water, and how you can find water as ice, water, and water vapor in different places.” “UMM actually that’s Modalism, and that’s heresy!”

        Basically the church just assigns an “-ism” for every conventional way to understand or know the Trinity, then insists that it is Unknowable.

        • The Dark Lord ☑️@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yup. I’ve heard many, (like the tri-colour toothpaste) and at one point I learned all the ways they were heresy.

          I’m going to use that logic toward everything in my life now. Why are you spending your money on a big tv instead of investing it? That makes no sense! Exactly. That’s how you know my logic is divine.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ve recently been reading scholarly books about early Christendom and it was after Jesus and the first generation of Christians that apologists came up with the trinity. I don’t have the name of the guy who wrote that fanfic, but it was mentioned in Jesus the Jew by Geza Vermes. But that’s me being pedantic.

    Christians: Jesus didn’t believe in pronouns! Jesus: I am he.

    • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Bart Ehrman talks about how their conception of Jesus changed. Human dude chosen by god. Human dude turned holy by god. God dude born holy.

      Something like that.