Let us celebrate the divine Logos

Which is Zeus.

If any member of the Judaic sect of the Nazarenes (aka as Christians) should claim that their plagiarism of the Logos doctrine is anything but a weak parody of the Heraclitian and Stoic concept, refering to Zeus, and a revelation of their god (which are actually three lol!), if any one of this Judaic sect should claim this, let him be called a petty liar and a thief, and be thrown to the lions.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=q491vuBq3WI
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Indeed.

Reality ain't static. The Logos gotta be littered with the strife of the harmony of opposites. The Trinity aka "Yawheh+Paganism" ain't my God he is a fusion of Hellenistic and Judaism and probably Gnostism as well :DD ZEUS and the pantheon not Jesus and Paul Ok Praise Heralcitus

>their god (which are actually three lol!)
Pic related.

>Yawheh+Paganism
?

>three actually different persons
>not three gods
K.

The Holy Spirit is comparable to several other Pagan concepts of similar function, The Gnostic Sophia being one, but it's a common thing in Neo-Platonic inspired mysticism and religion.

Jesus as God that must dye and rise also shares some parallels with some mystery cults.

In general the religion of Christianity was spread almost exclusivily through Gentiles (who would have seen these Pagan concepts of God as normal) and Hellenized Jews that would have latched onto them: Paul being the chief Hellenized Jew.

Hence Yawheh+Paganism

>worshipping a drunken rapist

Kek, pagans!

This triune God (or Trinity) began to allude to this aspect of His nature right in Genesis 1:26–27. There we read that “God said, ‘Let us make man in our image’ . . . God created man in His image.” Here God is a plural noun, said is in the third-person singular verb form, and we see both the plural pronoun our and the singular His referring to the same thing (God’s image). This is not horribly confused grammar. Rather, we are being taught, in a limited way, that God is a plurality in unity. We can’t say from this verse that He is a trinity, but God progressively reveals more about Himself in later Scriptures to bring us to that conclusion.

In Isaiah 48:12–16 we find the speaker in the passage describing himself as the Creator and yet saying that “the Lord God and His Spirit have sent Me.” This is further hinting at the doctrine of the trinity, which becomes very clear in the New Testament. There are many other Old Testament Scriptures that hint at the same idea.

In Matthew 28:18–20 Jesus command His disciples to baptize His followers in the name (singular) of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. John’s Gospel tells us that “the Word” is God who became man in Jesus Christ (John 1:1–3, 14). Jesus was fully man and fully God. Many other verses combine together to teach that God is triune.

As a start on a thorough discussion on this topic, the chart in pic related is an accumulation of many of the passages that show the deity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

pls

>Here God is a plural noun, said is in the third-person singular verb form, and we see both the plural pronoun our and the singular His referring to the same thing (God’s image).
Nice pasta by some undisclosed apologist site. Actually Yahweh here, as chief of the early Hebrew polytheistic pantheon, is addressing the other gods or Elohim.

Cont.

See the Elohim explained by an unbiased scholar:

youtube.com/watch?v=q491vuBq3WI

Why are people ao triggered by Christianity?

so*

Why is Christianity so triggered by anything that isn't Christianity?

Few serious scholars think that the Greek tradition did not effect Christian Dogma, but you want to pretend that is zeigiest tier nonsense no one can stop you.

Why are Christians so triggered by the truth? Namely that your entire theology is stolen from "pagans" and the Jesus cult was an apocalyptic second temple judaism sect turned state religion by power-hungry demagogues?

>was an apocalyptic second temple judaism sect turned state religion by power-hungry demagogues?
And your point is?

>Said the religion whose entire Theology is based on WE ARE RIGHT! WE ARE RIGHT!!!!
Monotheists are triggered by the very existence of other religions t.b.h.

The significance of Logos comes from the Septuagint, not Heraclitus or the Stoics (for some examples of the OT using Logos in the unique sense it has in the NT, see Psalms 107:20 and Isaiah 55:11).

That is, in Christianity. What I'm saying is the Christian use of the term "Logos" is not inherited from Greek philosophy, it's inheritdd from the OT.

Your scholarly source for this conclusion is what exactly?

The Logos of the verses I cited (also see Isaiah 45:23, which uses the phrase "every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess", a phrase connected very much with Christ in the NT) obviously doesn't come from Greek philosophy, it's the Hebrew Bible, and it is explicitly clear it's the same concept as in the NT. The Logos of the OT is a major element of the conception of Christ in the NT.

You didn't answer the question. Cite a peer reviewed scholarly source to back up your claim. It is far from explicitly clear.

>Why are people ao triggered by Christianity?

Because it's a sandnigger religion.

cerebrate this dick

It is explicitly clear, because the Word referred to in Isiah 55:11 is the figure of Isaiah 55:4-5

>Behold, I have given him for a witness to the people, a leader and commander to the people. Behold, thou shalt call a nation that thou knowest not, and nations that knew not thee shall run unto thee because of the Lord thy God, and for the Holy One of Israel; for he hath glorified thee.

>Psalms 107
The same old Christian apologetic strategy. Taking a non-Messianic psalm out of context and "interpret" it to refer to Christ because the word "word" appears in it, which of course translates to logos in Greek.

First you have to prove that this psalm was ever interpreted as messianic by any tradition, Jewish or Christian, and not by apologists cherry-picking for the word logos.

Then you have to prove that hellenized Jews that translated the OT into Greek (in Alexandria of all places! the city of Philo of Alexandria, who also borrowed the Greek term logos directly from Greek philosophy).

Then you have to explain this, from the same psalm:

>11 Because they rebelled against the words of God, and contemned the counsel of the most High:

The words, plural. If we go by your logic then there are more than one Jesus because here it says words in the plural, and that translates to logos too right?

I won't bother to go through your other references, as I expect the same level of ad hoc "apology". If I am wrong the post the rebuttal don't expect us to take your word (logos?) for it .

There was an unfinished sentence:

You have to prove that the hellenized Jews from Alexandria didn't get the term logos from Greek philosophy. Which on a second thought doesn't make any difference here because it is obvious from the context that logos here is used in the normal sense of "word".

>that translates to logos too
I don't think it does. I'm pretty sure logos isn't the ordinary Greek term for just a plain old "word" which is why it's typically used to translate anything signifying "Divine Word" as a distinct concept. "Rebelling against" God's "words" just means disobeying his commandments.

Christians have always interpreted psalms as prophetic. The Gospels and epistles cite psalms.

>I don't think it does
You're wrong.
>Every psalm is prophetic
Source

The attempt being made here by Christian apologists to pass cherry-picked occurrences of the word "word" in the OT as signifying a separate divine hypostasis is beyond weak really.

Relax, I'm not trying to "refute" you. By the way, Christian theology does make reference to logoi (plural), but I'm not sure what the earliest reference of that kind is.

I wasn't claiming that all psalms are prophetic, just that Christians citing psalms is typical.

Also there's this passage that seems to indicate early Christians believed references to Christ were all over the OT:
>John 5:39 (KJV)
>39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

What do you make of pic related? I saw it brought up in a thread yesterday or the day before. I thought it was quite intriguing, really.

>Christian theology
Again taking a page from the (pagan) Greeks, Christian theology considered the bible to be composed of logia (plural of logion) or divine sayings, which was what the Greeks called the sayings of oracles. Logoi would be just plural for "word" in the common sense of the word, not in any way used as meaning a separate divine hypostasis by any but re most mendacious Christians.

>early Christians
Considers prophetic actual messianic passages as per Jewish tradition. Surely the strategy to mendaciously cherry-pick with an ill-will to deceive is not out of character for a Christian, master deceivers and "holy" liars that they are, but I think that the cherry-picked example by the user above is a novel and quite lame attempt at looking for Jesus in the OT.

>lord God and his spirit
Never interpreted as to mean two different hypostasis by the authors and recipients of the text, and not even by all early Christians. The trinitarian patch-work dogma was only imposed and the differing views persecuted Bolshevik-style after the nycean council.

I'm sure he isn't the first to point it out. Church fathers like Chrysostom, Athanasius, etc have drawn attention to many passages they believe refer to Christ.

Yeah, logoi (as in inner existence giving principles) seems like it could be directly borrowed from Greek philosophy. But you could make a biblical case for it with pssages referring to God as maintaining things by his words. I know there's a passage like that somewhere, I think in psalms.

You don't believe that the Gospels, and the Pauline writings are explicitly trinitarian? It seems like they are.

I find it so hard to identify the logos, metaphysical truth as the Christian message. I like Platonic and Christian philosophy, but the new testament itself so clearly speaks to me as unsustainable apocalyptic philosophy with clear cultural antecedents.

I understand the concept of faith, yet to give myself over "body and soul" to such a strict, incoherent, and exclusive ideology that Christianity perpetuates is something I can't do. I

Maintaining the universe by his word. I believe you could find the same concept in the epic of Gilgamesh and other texts.

No I don't believe them to be Trinitarian and even Christian apologists will admit that is not "explicitly" stated in the bible.

Fuck logos, first came Praxis.

>God creates humanity
>gives them free will
>they worship their own impulses, the natural world, and the creations of their imagination instead of God their creator and source of all good
>le deluge
>starts over with Noah
>same shit happens
>fuck it, i'll just pick out one oppressed nation, save them and surely they will be my representatives on earth
>they worship canaanite gods instead
>he is patient with them
>sends them prophets to rebuke them and turn them back to the right path
>they kill the prophets
>sends his only Son
>they crucify him
>last straw
>anyone who worships Me in spirit and truth, and acknowledges my Son is good enough
it's only exclusivist in the sense that humanity has willfully excluded God for thousands of years

>Hebrew God picks one nation
>kills and torments other nations to bring about earthly benefit of this one group of people
>Eventually sends son whose actions are similar to that of almost any crazy homeless person.
>He proceeds to verbally attack authority and wealthy people, propagates an unsustainable and apocalyptic lifestyle message
>Gets killed