Originally posted by josephw
You're an atheist! You say there is no God. So therefore, if there was a God, you wouldn't know it. For you to say that John is in error about the nature of Jesus, when he was an eye wittness, is pure folly.
I love to debate too. I suggest you stick with the debate about the existence of God untill that is resolved.
I am an atheist, but let's sort it out: I am talking out of love. I have nothing to prove and I respect everybody's personal aletheia -and I respect your personal aletheia.
The Christian God is Love, otherwise is cancelled. And the first metaphysic theory of love in Europe is related with Plato -Symposium!-, and this is the reason why personages like St. Augustine and Origen were based at this specific line of thought in order to bring up an understandable doctrine regarding the Christian religion and the Christian concept of Agape. The understanding of the Platonic and the Christian doctrines is essential -and, mind you, the early Greek fathers of the Church tried hard to save according to their convenience (in order to promote solid interpretation of their religion, that is) the most possible Platonic elements causing by the way the rage of the Platonist philosophers. And this is the reason why shortly before his death Ignatius wrote to Romans in paragraph 7 “… my eros is not synonym of love… My eros was crucified, and there is not inside me a burning desire and passion for the ephemeral” (my translation). However Origen defined “eros” as identical to the Christian Agape regarding John A 4:8 because he used the OT verses “taftin efilisa kai eksezitisa ek neotitos mou kai ezitisa nimfin agagesthai emafto kai erastis egenomin tou kallous aftis” -and he fails because Plato stated clearly that Eros is not a God, whilst this is also a false approach of the Christian religion. Origen was stranded.
Over here I do not try to prove that Platonism and Christianity are totally different or to prove that the former is superior to the other or the opposite. You will find no philosopher well versed on Platonism eager to declare that Christianity (Religion/ Life) is identical to Platonism (Philosophy/ Life). Plato is not justified by means of Christianity and the vice versa, because both of them need no justification. One cannot prove that Plato is a predecessor of the early fathers of the Christian Church, and one cannot prove that the Christian doctrine itself is vulgar Platonism as it is supposed that it was stated by Nietzsche: the German (sorry Freaky darling) was talking about the futile attempts of St. Augustine amongst else to use the Platonic logic in order to bring up an understanding of the Christian doctrines -and these attempts, yes, in my opinion they are indeed vulgar Platonism.
The Christian thesis is clear: Agape is necessary for the well being of the Human because it is the victory against the death (of the soul, of course: Plato conceived this victory as “Agathe memory” and “memory of the products of the spirit”, whilst the Christian religion defines this victory as salvation of the sinful nature of the Human) and as the agent for one's perfection because it is the link between God and Human -and this is the reason why it is stated that “the Human becomes theofilis”. Agape is visible at the parables (Samaritan etc) and at the teachings of Paul, and there were attempts for Agape’s philosophic back up by St. Augustine, Dante, Fenelon, St. Francois de Sales and Pascal amongst else. But, in my opinion, the most superb point is offered by A’ Cor. 13 1-8.
So Agape is alien to our senses whilst this is not the case in Platonism. Agape recognizes not sexes because is psychical, and the soul has no sex although we are aware of Asma Asmaton -and once more St. Augustine brings up vulgar Platonism. However Plato’s Eros is based on the metaphysic belief that the existence of the Ideas is aletheia, and that at this level the On is perfect. We can get to know these Ideas by means of our senses, claims Plato, and then these senses of ours are entering Einai and they participate in the being thanks to the existence of the Ideas. Plato offers that this understanding is a product of the non-conceptual power of the soul and at the same time a product of Noisis (mind). Of course this exact doctrine regarding understanding has Eastern roots (in the Eastern philosophy we are talking about conceptual and non-conceptual awareness, ie for meditation at a deep level of specific Yoga practices). This is the basis, claims Plato, of the rising of Eros. And at this very point Aristotle gets deep into Platonism and states that the gravitational force of Eros is so intensive that it becomes the Rule/ Cause of the Kinisis of Kosmos (Metaphysics 1072b3).
But according to the Christian doctrine Agape is created not from the passive existence of God but of his energetic existence. Because the main point is not the Agape of the Human to God but the opposite (John A 4, 10). God’s Agape for the Human is so extremely strong that God entered the Greatest of the Unconceivable Humiliations -he sacrificed his Son for the salvation of the Human (John A 4, 9). God’s Agape for the Human has no cause: if Satan was asking God why he feels so much Agape for the Human, God would not answer -there is no Because! Even the Hell is a creation of God out of his Agape for the Human, as it is claimed by Dante.
I could keep up ad infinitum with many many details regarding your respectful religion. However the Christian religion is just a religion -one does not use his mind but his belief: s/he believes or s/he believes not. I respect every religion, yours included, and I will fight to ensure that everybody will be feel to enjoy her/ his religion to the hilt. But stop trying to prove that your religion is rational because actually it is not. And the doctrine of the Christian Trinity is as irrational as it gets. And methinks it is a shame for a Christian to try to offer an out of the blue "explanation" the way St. Augustine and the other fathers did. You have nothing to prove! You belittle your religion whenever you attempt to explain it by reason. You cannot use philosophy in order to decipher and to back up a religion -you can solely use theology. Any attempt to prove that a religion, the Christian one included, is philosophically accepted is futile, because it fails to pass the philosophic test.
Methinks the Christian is not Christian simply because s/he firmly believes that the God is existent. S/He is Christian because s/he firmly believes that God is Panagathos although s/he sees and s/he tastes all this suffering in the world of ours. And s/he is Christian due to the fact that s/he feels her/ his God’s endless, unimaginable and unconceivable Agape. So the Christian has to honor God by expressing Agape for every human being, and by understanding that first one gets rid of the log in her/ his own eye and then s/he will see well enough to deal with the speck in her/ his friend's eye. The Christian has to empty her/ himself from his negativity just as Jesus emptied his body from life on the cross. The Christian is Christian because s/he avoids her/ his own negativities and impurities.
So it is not this miserable atheist blavk beetle the one who belittles the Christian religion although I deny the existence of your God because my way is the evaluation of the mind. I know that your God is quite existent for you because your way is your Pistis. So your religion is belittled by the attitude of the fundamentalist fanatics that they are trying constantly to convert everybody, to “prove” by any means that their religion is not a religion and that their religion is the “absolute truth” and all that jazz.
May All Beings Be Happy
😵
What Others Said about the Trinity
19 Dec '09 14:53
Back to Top