New Sects That Emerged Due to Contradictions, Illogicalities and Discrepancies Regarding the Trinity
- Following the decision to include the Holy Spirit as one member of the three-in-one, the debates and disagreements over the Trinity increased still further.
- As a result of these debates, the idea emerged that the Holy Spirit should appear both from the Father and from the Son. The concept of filioque, meaning "from the son," was thus added to the doctrine of the Trinity.
- For that reason, and because of other problems that arose later, the Church of Rome divided into two parts, Catholic and Orthodox, in 1054.
- The Catholic Church, which accepted filioque (as well as the Protestant Church that would later break away from it) believed that the Holy Spirit emerged from both the Father and the Son, making the already confusing belief in the Trinity even more complex.
- The Orthodox Church, which rejected filioque, maintains that the Holy Spirit comes from the Father alone. The greatest disagreement between the two churches, and which has come down to the present day, regarding the Trinity involves filioque.
- Therefore, the Holy Spirit was recognized as divine by the advocates of the Trinity 56 years after the recognition of the divinity of the Son.
To summarize the actions taken to resolve the confusion over the Trinity: (surely God is beyond this) The explicit and official recognition of the divine status of Jesus stems from the decision of the Council of Nicaea in 325 and the divine status of the Holy Spirit from the Council of Constantinople in 381. The dual nature of Jesus, one part divine and one part human, was raised at the councils of Ephesus in 431 and Chalcedon in 451, and the question of filioque, the Holy Spirit coming from Jesus was discussed at the councils held in Toledo in 447 and 589 and was resolved at the Council of Constantinople. This brief summary here reveals that further confusion was loaded onto Christianity at every council.
To reiterate, all the information provided above is based on documentation and other evidence from Christian, not Muslim, historians and theologians. This provides essential information on how Christianity developed and how the Gospel assumed its present form. These are fundamental historical details proving that the belief in the Trinity has no place in the true Gospel.
What someone needs to do after seeing all this evidence is to seek to understand the truth by reflecting and using logic, analyzing the Gospel in view of all these historical data. In order to pursue this logical inquiry, the following questions should be considered in the light of reason and good conscience:
- Each Divine scripture sent down to each faith is unique. How is it possible for there to be four separate Gospels in Christianity and for each one to be considered valid by itself?
- If each of the four books is true, then how did the inconsistencies between them, the serious gaps of meaning and major discrepancies of the historical data all come about?
- How could a true book sent down to a true faith have been identified "by majority vote" from among books espousing different beliefs?
- Why were those Gospels and early manuscripts espousing monotheism that did not receive a majority vote burned and destroyed?
- Why were people who espoused monotheism sentenced to death? And what was the reason for that opposition and savagery?
- The four Gospels and the idea of the Trinity that entered Christianity were recognized in the Fourth Century. What is the position of those Christians who were unaware of the Gospels and the Trinity before then?
- The idea of the Holy Spirit as divine emerged much later. Were the Church and all other Christians who did not regard the Holy Spirit as divine before that all in a state of sin?
- The Church regards the authors of the canonical Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John as people who received revelation. Were these people prophets? How can anyone – even the disciples – who is not a prophet receive Divine revelation? So could the disciples in question not have attained the status of prophets?
- How can a majority vote by the Church decide whether someone received revelation or not?
- How is it possible for it to be agreed in a vote that someone received Divine revelation and to rule that what he wrote is "unalterable and unchanging" after a great many amendments have been made to it?
- If the four Gospels are unalterable, how can the Church have made additions to them over many years, rearranging some parts and removing others?
- No earlier Christian could have adhered to those parts of the Gospels that were added on later. So what is the position of the Christians in question up to that time?
- How can a Christian arrange his life and faith, not on the basis of trustworthy verses from the Gospel and his own conscience and reason, but on the basis of a form of belief set out by the Church and that altered over the course of time?
- Why is it only in Christianity that there are such differences of opinion on the subject of the existence and oneness of God, the basis of all the true faiths and that is also explicitly set out in all other religions?
- Which one of the different Christian sects that all recognize different books is on the true path? Which sect’s books are unchanging and indisputably true?
- How is it that the number of books can gradually rise from 23 to 27 in a single sect? Which should be regarded as true?
No Christian who supports the Trinity can give a truly logical, rational, comprehensible, convincing, clear and concrete answer to the above questions. This extraordinary confusion under the name of the Trinity is completely inexplicable.
The above questions refer to just some of the discrepancies on the subject of the four canonical Gospels on the basis of historical facts. The real issue is the profound logical collapse that belief in the Trinity brings with it. It is this profound and deep-rooted logical collapse that must cause sincere Christians to doubt their belief in the Trinity. This will be discussed in the pages that follow.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder