Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Why Not Arianism?

  1. #1
    Providence Planter
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American
    Ancestry
    Anglo
    Subrace
    Nordic
    Y-DNA
    R1A-BY30613
    mtDNA
    U8B-K2A5A1
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Rhode Island Rhode Island
    Location
    Kentucky
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Blacksmith
    Politics
    Anti-Federalist
    Religion
    Posts
    3,697
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,040
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    399
    Thanked in
    346 Posts

    Why Not Arianism?

    If you're Christian, why Protestantism, Catholicism or Orthodoxy and yet not Arianism?

    If you take Conciliar Christianity for granted, would it concern you to know that Church Councils pretended to have power for excommunicating the original Christians, the Aramaic Syriacs, for being Unitarian? Therefore, despite Constantine converting to Arianism on his deathbed and only Theodosius later making it the law to worship the Trinity, it is funny to make believe Christianity has always been the same. It's also laughably ridiculous to pretend that we must be Christian because Caesar decreed it in a foreign country and only his version is lawful elsewhere than Byzantium.

    Caesaropapism is just a Jewish version of emperor worship, with the "Vicar of Christ" in Cephas a Vatican avatar for High Priest Caiaphas. Only since the Christian system did any king or emperor require Papal coronation to be legitimate, an echo of the Davidic establishment that built up Saul and tore him down for lack of mass murdering Indo-European Philistines and scalping their foreskins from the corpses for Yahweh.

    It's obvious that the latter Saul of Tarsus imparted a watered down Judaism upon the Gentiles, whom were disavowed by Jesus himself alongside the Jews' own Israelite brethren of Samaria, for not following the House of David.

    If Arianism was the original Germanic version of the Nazarene sect, why not reclaim it? Furthermore, since the Trinity is an Indo-European Pythagorean theology, why suffer to play second fiddle with Jews and Muslims authentically representative of their respective tribalism, but somehow we aren't worthy of the same ancestral venerations, even as Hindus and Buddhists never succumbed to such Holocaustianity guilt trips about the Crucifixion and other forms of self-loathing esteemed so highly by Europeans?

    Wouldn't you rather just dispense with the Jewish mythology of the Bible if you cannot stomach Abrahamic monotheism? It's not like Persia and Greece hadn't already formulated Indo-European monotheism, so why tack on a foreign veneer and fight "Crusades" or hold "Inquisitions" to the point of Indo-European fratricide?

    It's crazy to justify the Crusades against Arabs, all the while LARPing as Nazarene Jews to make the "Kingdom of Jerusalem" on one hand, as if only Dhimmitude like suffered by Aryans under Shi'a in Persia, but glorifying a "Crusader Occupied Government" is something vastly preparative for "Zionist Occupied Government". As the logic goes, that acceptance of one is hardly true opposition to another, when cut from the same cloth.

    Just think about it: Prussians were Trinitarian pagans who had yet to be interested in the monotheism of Semitic Christianity--this was the case for "Christians" who were 9/10ths Gentile or Goyim. If our own ancestors couldn't stomach the strict monotheism even though Constantine and the Goths did manage to parrot the Aramaic Nazarenes, wouldn't that mean our Trinitarian ancestors were closer to paganism? Crusading against Prussians would be something very shameful then, since they were brethen in spirit, even if they refused to pay lip service to some Jew on a stick and his Chosen People instead. At least the original Prussians were honest and not hedging their bets.

    To be consistent, wouldn't someone prefer Christian Unitarianism or Heathen Trinitarianism, but maybe they're not exactly mutually exclusive? Or, maybe we might acknowledge that the Hebrews weren't even monotheist until Moses plagiarized the hated Egyptians by imposing Akhenaten's religion, but otherwise ripped off Hammurabi as Noah was a rip-off of Gilgamesh. So, if Jesus and all his supposedly prophetic basis was hogwash to start with and it's no more "real" than our own Indo-European traditions, why bother at all with those foreigners we're perennially frustrated with for political and other reasons?

    It's well-known that the Semites worship an infanticidal idol, who takes your first born in Gehenna immolations, that was understood by the Greeks and Romans regarding the Phœnicians long before they fell for Jewish dupery in Christ. Sickening how Christian Zionists claim to be pro-life while shaking hands with the biggest abortionists in the world and all because of John 3:16.

  2. #2
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Siebenbürgerin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Transylvanian Saxon
    Subrace
    Alpinid/Baltid
    State
    Transylvania Transylvania
    Location
    Hermannstadt
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Ethno-Cultural
    Religion
    Lutheran
    Posts
    2,761
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    240
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    517
    Thanked in
    255 Posts
    For me Arianism is not right because it's nontrinitarian. Like other nontrinitarian faiths, it has a fundamental flaw when it comes to the interpretation of the relationship between God the Father and God the Son. Arius' syllogism states: "If the Father begat the Son, he that was begotten had a beginning of existence: and from this it is evident, that there was a time when the Son was not. It therefore necessarily follows, that he had his substance from nothing". But this is wrong in my view because God the Father and God the Son are both part of the Trinity and have always coexisted. Jesus not only spread the Word of God to humanity, he is the Word. This is revealed in the opening chapter of the Gospels: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being." So if Jesus was not only there at the creation of the universe, but also responsible for the creation of all things, then the conclusion is that he's also God. Jesus's birth, life and death as a human is an incarnation, but Jesus isn't only human, he's also divine. The Trinity - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God and one substance in three divine persons.

    Personally, I follow Christianity not because I like all of its aspects but because I believe it to be the truth. While there are many points which I admire, there are also commandments which I find difficult to keep from a personal point of view. For example, it's almost impossible not to lie. We all do it, even if it's a white lie or a lie out of the intention to spare someone's feelings. Sometimes I also secretly "covet" things, if I see the a person who has a big happy family or carefree life, there's a part of me that envies them a little bit. But I don't only try to follow the commandments which I like, but all of them. Because the way I see it, God is perfect and God is just and so are his standards. Even if I can't be perfect according to those standards, I still try to live my best, to be objective and not fall into the trappings which some peoples do out of personal reasons. For example, there are peoples who go to a specific church because they like its architecture, because their friends attend it or because it's easy to reach (only a 5 min walk). In my view, those things are less important than the doctrine which the church teaches, which should be the most important and decisive factor. Another example would be those "LGBTQ Christians" who join the churches which are the most friendly and accepting towards homosexuality. But it's not those churches which hold the truth because traditional, "orthodox" Christianity considers homosexuality to be a sin and that's not based on personal preference, or hatred and bigotry but on biblical truth. As long as the doctrine is wrong, all these other details like which country or peoples adopted the faith don't matter as much, especially since Germanic peoples adopted the wrong ideology at times in their history too, so it's also possible to adopt the wrong religion. It's like saying we should all bleach our hair because the Vikings did it. In my view, we should also examine the benefits and disadvantages of traditions. On a final note the reason I try to obey God's teachings is because I don't want to be on the wrong side on Judgment Day. But even in this life, Christianity still prevails to this day despite the effort of so many peoples who tried to force it to die down. In my view, there might be something of divine nature which aided Christianity in its expansion and duration. There have been many other faiths and cults which didn't survive or about which we've very little information but Christianity survived persecution and censorship of many eras (atheistic, communistic, totalitarian, etc.)

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Siebenbürgerin For This Useful Post:


  4. #3
    Providence Planter
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American
    Ancestry
    Anglo
    Subrace
    Nordic
    Y-DNA
    R1A-BY30613
    mtDNA
    U8B-K2A5A1
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Rhode Island Rhode Island
    Location
    Kentucky
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Blacksmith
    Politics
    Anti-Federalist
    Religion
    Posts
    3,697
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,040
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    399
    Thanked in
    346 Posts
    How can one believe that the Trinity is absolutely correct when it was not the view of the Apostles and Nazarene fellowship, but extrapolated after Paul spread it to the Greeks and Romans, who were the ones responsible for theorizing and finally enforcing your preferred view in the 4th century, long after the legit Christian community was already traditionally worshipping in belief of the Unity? If they were and still are the original Christians, then by what right does anyone else have to redefine the nature of their religion to fit outsider agendas? It's especially rich to have former persecutors adopt your religion that they once held against you, then remake said beliefs to further hold against you, which is why the Assyrians of Antioch are treated like a red-headed stepchild of Jesus and ignored by all the Gentile wannabe Christians who were never part of the Biblical covenant. Assyrians wrote the Aramaic parts of the Old Testament and were there for John the Baptist as well as Jesus, long before Saul became Paul, so how could they be wrong? If one seriously believed Christianity instead of imposed their own ideas, they wouldn't edit the fundamentals, but believe them as they stood. Therefore, the Arians and Constantine represent the original Gentiles who accepted indigenous Christianity of Galilee and were not just trying to square Christianity with paganism, to make it more palatable for Indo-Europeans. Either you are pagan or Christian, but the majority are unable to make up their minds and are like you, trying to ride the fence to hedge your bets in anxieties.

  5. #4
    6th army lives matter
    Chlodovech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Flemish
    Ancestry
    Frankish
    Country
    Holy Roman Empire Holy Roman Empire
    Gender
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    3,794
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,199
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,269
    Thanked in
    1,511 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall
    Why Not Arianism?
    Because it's a failed, uninteresting heresy no-one cares about and which belongs to history. And because being an adherent of Arianism today means being an anachronistic; non-committal & regressive contrarian for the sake of being so, mostly online, as it would be pure larping without real world consequences - it would be no different from normies effortlessly going around calling themselves Buddhists. You wouldn't even belong to a church. There would be no priests and no community. It would be you and who else? The heresy will die with you once more. By rejecting the trinity no Christian church, whether Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox, is even going to recognise your claim to being Christian. If you're going to be Christian today, be Christian properly - as opposed to indulging in labelism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    If they were and still are the original Christians, then by what right does anyone else have to redefine the nature of their religion to fit outsider agendas?
    They were not the original Christians and orthodox Christianity was at odds with Arianism from day one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall
    If one seriously believed Christianity instead of imposed their own ideas, they wouldn't edit the fundamentals, but believe them as they stood.
    Arius was a heretic from the third century A.D., hardly responsible for the fundamentals. And other heretics preceded him. So why become a follower of Arius and not Marcion or Montanus? The answer is: if you take Christianity and tradition seriously in the 21st century, the last thing you will do is adopt Arianism or any other obscure & ancient heretical creed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall
    The Arians and Constantine represent the original Gentiles who accepted indigenous Christianity of Galilee
    The original following of Christ in the flesh had been dead for well over a century when Arius did his thing. The Arians represent the sectarianism of the Christian-Egyptian scene of that timeframe.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall
    Either you are pagan or Christian, but the majority are unable to make up their minds and are like you, trying to ride the fence to hedge your bets in anxieties.
    Siebenbürgerin will sit at the right hand of the Lord when the day comes, but only if she remains a loyal & faithful daughter and avoids being corrupted by the internet.
    “War is waged by men; not by beasts, or by gods. It is a peculiarly human activity. To call it a crime against mankind is to miss at least half its significance; it is also the punishment of a crime.” - Frederic Manning, The Middle Parts of Fortune

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Chlodovech For This Useful Post:


  7. #5
    Providence Planter
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American
    Ancestry
    Anglo
    Subrace
    Nordic
    Y-DNA
    R1A-BY30613
    mtDNA
    U8B-K2A5A1
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Rhode Island Rhode Island
    Location
    Kentucky
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Blacksmith
    Politics
    Anti-Federalist
    Religion
    Posts
    3,697
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,040
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    399
    Thanked in
    346 Posts
    So, nobody will defend the Assyrians who were Christian before any of our ancestors tampered with their religion and claimed it for themselves? Don't the Yids call that "chutzpah"? Why so obsessed with their way of life and yet denying their authority to decide what is right or wrong about it? That's pretty demented, to be so attached to the people who one absolutely cannot stand.

    I know I wouldn't be happy if Semites took it upon themselves to decide what is canonical paganism, but, oh wait...mimickers of Semites in fact did so in the course of Christianization. Either way, it's a systemic and systematic endorsement of multiculturalism as if a heavenly mandate, despite its service for worldly gain.

    There's no true faith in an Indogermanic Judaizer, just a parody of piety, of whatever stripe one calls his Christianity. What you are into is more about Julius Evola, Alain de Benoist and the Nouvelle Droit than the case you're supposedly making, unless you are prepared to be excoriated as the Popish European version of a Protestant American fundamentalist and equally off the deep end. Sieben can speak for herself.

  8. #6
    6th army lives matter
    Chlodovech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Flemish
    Ancestry
    Frankish
    Country
    Holy Roman Empire Holy Roman Empire
    Gender
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    3,794
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,199
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,269
    Thanked in
    1,511 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Baorn
    Why so obsessed with their way of life and yet denying their authority to decide what is right or wrong about it? That's pretty demented, to be so attached to the people who one absolutely cannot stand. I know I wouldn't be happy if Semites took it upon themselves to decide what is canonical paganism.
    It can't be worse than having your religion defined and explained to you by a "non-observant Heathen" 2000 year after the facts. And Christian interest in early Christian communities is almost non-existent, hence there exists no obsession with them. At least not on the part of Christians.

    What you are into is more about Julius Evola, Alain de Benoist and the Nouvelle Droit.
    I'm mostly anti-Evolian and de Benoist is rather evidently not my cup of tea either.

    unless you are prepared to be excoriated as the Popish European version of a Protestant American fundamentalist
    ...says the guy who believed in X yesterday, Y today and Z tomorrow. When chronically incapable of truly believing in anything you'll never understand what it's like. But also: there's nothing fundamentalist about denouncing Arianism, all Christians object to it. "Fundamentalism" is a bit of a scam anyway: you're either Christian or you aren't. Not 'a little bit' or 'very much'.

    Just because you came to the conclusion that mainstream Christianity isn't Christian enough doesn't mean that Christians will ever follow you in that reasoning. And if you think my options are limited to being either an Evolian or a Christian fundamentalist then that says a lot about your approach to religion & ideology - it's also shows how miniscule your understanding of Christianity & Catholicism and their organic, historical growth is.

    Sieben can speak for herself.
    Am I speaking for her? Were you responding to her then? You were talking about the majority of Christians of which she is merely a representative, just as much a I am. And I addressed the points you make about Arianism and your opinion of how Christian Siebenbürgerin is, of which I have an opinion myself too. You can't seriously expect to talk of Arians as the original Christians without expecting some feedback.
    “War is waged by men; not by beasts, or by gods. It is a peculiarly human activity. To call it a crime against mankind is to miss at least half its significance; it is also the punishment of a crime.” - Frederic Manning, The Middle Parts of Fortune

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Chlodovech For This Useful Post:


  10. #7
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Bleyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Transylvania Transylvania
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Ethnocentrism
    Religion
    Tradition
    Posts
    147
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    134
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    174
    Thanked in
    65 Posts
    Arianism is a heretical and virtually dead movement. As Chlodovech says, it would be you and who else? Where and how were you to conduct your religious life? Even if you're the type that doesn't frequent church and lives a private spiritual life, you'd still need some doctrinal sources to consult in case you have a question or unclarity. Or in case you get any co-followers who have questions. Where would those sources come from? For comparison, if a Christian has a question, he consults the Bible, traditional Christian writings or his church fathers.

    Anyway, Arianism isn't original Christianity, it came much later. Apart from being nontrinitarian, it based its interpretations on already existing, established Christianity. So if you dislike Christianity or disagree with some of its fundamental principles, it doesn't make sense to root for Arianism instead. And if you agree with the fundamental principles of Christianity, then you might as well choose traditional Christianity because it's the original, true, unadulterated source.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Bleyer For This Useful Post:


  12. #8
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rædwald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Online
    7 Hours Ago @ 02:47 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Saxon
    Gender
    Age
    28
    Occupation
    Thrower of Rocks
    Politics
    Anti-Judaist
    Religion
    Crypto-Marcionite
    Posts
    860
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    174
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    339
    Thanked in
    185 Posts
    Rodskarl, Chlod's point about taking up Arianism as really being a form of larping is the essential response to your question. The only people I've ever witnessed claiming themselves to be "Arians" were absolutely doing such. I believe this response applies especially because your question isn't even theological, so much as what could be considered more Germanic based on historical events.

    No one should pick a faith based on aesthetics, least of all an intelligent person. And picking something dead with no extant community usually means you're making yourself your own pope. I think this a dangerous moral position to be in.
    If only you knew how bad things really are

  13. #9
    Providence Planter
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American
    Ancestry
    Anglo
    Subrace
    Nordic
    Y-DNA
    R1A-BY30613
    mtDNA
    U8B-K2A5A1
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Rhode Island Rhode Island
    Location
    Kentucky
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Blacksmith
    Politics
    Anti-Federalist
    Religion
    Posts
    3,697
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,040
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    399
    Thanked in
    346 Posts
    Church Councils after the fact tried killing beliefs that already existed. So, therefore, Assyrian Orthodoxy still exists, as do others like Armenian Apostolic Orthodoxy, while Arianism was reclaimed by the time Calvin burnt Servetus at the stake in Geneva and at least three American Presidents, namely Adams father and son, plus Taft were all Unitarian.

    Where do you get off being ahistorical about Trinitarianism vs Unitarianism? In Christianity, Unitarianism came first, believed by the original Semitic Christians. Only after Indo-European conversion did Trinitarianism become established. Jesus was just a rabbi in Nazareth and an observant Jew who competed with Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes over faithfulness to their Father Abraham.

    Who's the heretic? Anachronistically depicting Jesus like a son of Zeus with a maiden mother is just Gentile mythology that came later and wasn't even an article of faith in the writings of John, the most mystic of them. At best, John was a Gnostic and so, yes, Marcionists and Donatists, as well as Arians all flourished before that murderer Cyril whispered in the ear of Theodosius to force a single heretical theology and persecute dissenters.

    Simply put, if you believe in the Trinity, you are pagan and evidence of Gentile origins, thus espousing the biggest, most influential Christian heresy that bastardizes Judaism, because Christianity is the Nazarene sect thereof. Trying to excuse and justify all the Semitic-style fratricide in Europe for hair-splitting interpretations of the same Gentile heresies is very rich and ironic.

    Once again, if you don't sympathize with the original Aramaic Syrian Nazarenes who followed John the Baptist, Jesus and Peter, but wish to impose a Paulinist worldview on those who actually broke bread as the original church before the original Council of Jerusalem, you are Johnny-come-latelies without a clue. Yes, you must follow Kosher laws and practice circumcision as Jesus did, or you're just making a mockery of him and tooting your own horns like Paul gave you license to--Paul, the one who martyred Nazarenes and pretended to have a conscience afterward greater than the Apostles he bullied.

    Say that perhaps you don't begrudge the local Levantine Christians in Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria, but wish to follow Jesus in your own way as a Trinitarian Gentile within the orbits of Latin Rome, Greek Constantinople, or some Germanic Protestant variation of theirs more like the Gothic national church in constitution. Each is but an adaptation of European paganism with Semitic infusions through memorials to a mere faction of Judaism at the turn of the millennium and following century. Hence, modern Greek liturgy worships Theos in place of ancient Zeus and modern Latin worships Deus Pater instead of ancient Jupiter, whereas Germanics invoke God instead of ancient Guodan and none cry out to Yahweh or Elohim, because they are not true Christians, but Gentile heretic imposters.

    You know damn well that if pagan Ptolemy hadn't commissioned the Septuagint for the Library of Alexandria, Greeks wouldn't have read some random Hebrew Torah and Aramaic prophecies. You also know that if there were no Greeks trying to make sense of the Septuagint, Jerome wouldn't have made the Vulgate, nor would Rome have copied this "Hellenistic" ideology like they plagiarized all other forms of Greek culture. Hell, Constantine was so enamored with Greece, that he relocated the imperial capital to Byzantium in addition to converting to the original Unitarian form of Judaic Christianity. Only after was this changed to suit the Gentile pagan Trinitarian population of Rome, which is consequently the version our ancestors received.

    History and ethnolinguistics are not your strong suits. Sure, the original reason why I myself went back to Christian churches was because there was no real purely pagan society as in olden days. I even argued with fellow neopagans for the impractical nature of what is basically revisionist restorationism, but Christianity has similar movements like Mormonism. I don't think that it is worthwhile to continue paying lip service to a largely failed prophet from a foreign Tribe, because the Hebraic Babylonian Talmudists of Israel likewise treat the original Aramaic Nazarenes of Syria as heretics and they're all alone, with only Islam being the most successful representative of Semites as worshiped by Semites.

    It's absolutely pointless to be European Trinitarian and yet also insist on Jesus mattering, except in the context of the legacy of Græcoroman assimilation of all provincial cults and not just the Indo-European ones, but the Afroasiatic ones too. After all, no enthusiast of the Olympians insists on purifying Hellenism of similar Semitic beliefs like Adonis. Therefore, both paganism and Christianity as practiced by Gentiles, fail to draw the line where Semitic culture is concerned. The only difference is, that Semitic beliefs are not indigenous to our native paganism, yet fundamental to Christianity and the pagan Trinity is not. You obviously choose to continue propping up Zion amongst us, so cannot be taken seriously in your opposition to other desert fanatics.

  14. #10
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Bleyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Transylvania Transylvania
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Ethnocentrism
    Religion
    Tradition
    Posts
    147
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    134
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    174
    Thanked in
    65 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodskarl Dubhgall View Post
    Where do you get off being ahistorical about Trinitarianism vs Unitarianism?
    The Scriptures. Where are your sources?

    Jesus was just a rabbi in Nazareth and an observant Jew who competed with Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes over faithfulness to their Father Abraham.
    Jesus was not just a rabbi/teacher/mortal human being. Anyone who goes with that assumption can't call themselves a Christian, as they reject the essential message of Christianity and the Scripture. There are tons of reasons and scriptural examples why this view is a fallacy:

    - Jesus performed miracles that mortals cannot perform.

    - Jesus died and rose from the dead.

    - Jesus fulfilled numerous prophecies from the Old Testament (about 300 in total). No mortal person can achieve that. One professor, with 600 of his students, determined the probability of fulfilling even 8 prophecies in one person. The odds of doing so? 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000 or 1 in 10 to the 17th power.

    - When Jesus began his public ministry, he read a passage from Isaiah that was traditionally considered to be a messianic description. Then he set down the scroll and said: "Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing." His meaning was sufficiently clear to the assembly that they became enraged and tried to throw him off a cliff (Luke 4:16-30).

    - Jesus confirms his divinity with spiritual encounters with people. In Luke 24:30-34, we see that the spiritual presence of Jesus revealed his divinity to the people he was with. It wasn’t until Jesus spiritually encountered them that they began to truly see Jesus for who he is.

    - Jesus claimed to have existed before Abraham and before Creation, to have seen Heaven:

    John 8:56-58 "Before Abraham was, I am"

    John 17:5 "And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you *before the world began."

    John 3:13 "No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man."

    - Jesus was worshipped and accepted worship from his people, disciples and followers.

    Matt 16:15-17 "But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am? Simon Peter answered, You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God. Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven."

    John 20:27-29 “Then He said to Thomas, ‘Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.’ Thomas said to him, ‘My Lord and my God!’ Then Jesus told him, ‘Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.’"

    John 10:30-33 “‘I and the Father are one.’ Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, ‘I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?’ ‘We are not stoning you for any of these,’ replied the Jews, ‘but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.’”

    Colossians 1:15-16; 2:9 “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. . . . For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form. . .”

    Titus 2:13-14 “our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us. . .”

    - Jesus claimed equality with God the Father. He literally said "I am in the Father".

    John 5:17-18 “Jesus said to them, 'My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I, too, am working.' For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God” .

    John 7:28-29: “Then Jesus, still teaching in the temple courts, cried out, 'Yes, you know me, and you know where I am from. I am not here on my own, but he who sent me is true. You do not know him, but I know him because I am from him and he sent me.”

    John 10:30: “I and the Father are one.“

    John 14:7-11, 20: “'If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.' Philip said, 'Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.' Jesus answered: 'Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, "Show us the Father"? Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves. On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you.'“

    - numberous other Bible passages where Jesus is referred to as divine:

    Isaiah 7:14 “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.”

    Matthew 1:23 “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" (which means "God with us").”

    (“Immanuel” literally means “God with us.”)

    Isaiah 9:6 “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And He will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”

    Daniel 7:13-14 “There before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven . . . He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.”

    Matthew 2:11 “On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him.”

    - Jesus was sentenced to death and died because he was accused of blasphemy, claiming to be God. If Jesus was "just a rabbi/teacher", he could have easily defended himself by denying the allegations.

    A straightforward video:



    History and ethnolinguistics are not your strong suits.
    They don't seem to be yours either. You are aware that Arianism doesn't deny the fact that Jesus was the Son of God, aren't you? Arianists didn't dispute that, the reason they're non-trinitarian is because they disputed the Father and Son were co-eternal and consubstantial. Arians believed the Son was distinct from the Father, had no pre-existing condition and was subordinate to him. But they still believed that Jesus was more than a simple teacher, they just believed that Jesus's divinity was derived from the Father. Same with the Holy Spirit.

    Sure, the original reason why I myself went back to Christian churches was because there was no real purely pagan society as in olden days.
    That's a ridiculous reason, same as choosing Arianism because some Germanic tribes or figures adopted it at a point in time. Germanics also adopted marxism, multiculturalism, liberalism, etc. at some point, that doesn't mean that in 100 years, Germanic descendants should mimic it just because it was present and adopted in Germanic lands. Wen adopting an ideology or faith, the tenets of that ideology or faith are what's most relevant. Germanics have adopted many customs and staples that weren't originally Germanic. Potatoes for example aren't Germanic in origin, but potato salad is a typically German dish. Same with beer. If a product or idea is good, it can be adopted and adapted to present Germanic realities.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Bleyer For This Useful Post:


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The Christianization of Germanics and Arianism
    By Dagna in forum Germanic & Indo-Germanic Origins
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Saturday, April 25th, 2020, 03:58 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •