What I wonder is if he can back up these claims. (PS! Most of my questions here are rhetorical.)
Some heretic who thinks he can toss out a lot of claims without backing them up wrote:
1. The Trinity Doctrine is not taught anywhere in scripture, but trinities were common in Paganism and were prominent in Egypt and Babylon.
What, exactly, does he mean by there being ‘trinities’ in Paganism, especially in Egypt and Babylon? ‘Trinity’ is a Christian word, so ISTM that he, like many scholars of relgion in the 18th and 19th centuries, utilize Christian terminology when explaining what he finds in ‘paganism’ (as if that is a coherent whole). One of my pet peeves is the misuse of this term. ISTM that ‘paganism’ most often mean
something I don’t like but which kinda looks like something that might be pagan. Therefore I apply this term without backing this up with reference to atual pagan beliefs. What this author does is that he sees three pagan gods who has come kind of connection, and he applies the distinctively christian term ‘Trinity’ to them.
Some heretic who thinks he can toss out a lot of claims without backing them up wrote:
2. The beginnings of recognition of this doctrine started at the Council of Nicea approximately 325 AD. Hundreds of years after the last book in the Bible was written.
Proof numero uno that this person haven’t studied Church history.
Some heretic who thinks he can toss out a lot of claims without backing them up wrote:
3. The Council of Nicea was organized by the Roman Emperor Constantine and he had the final say on matters that he had little understanding of.
So he, being a kind of semi-arian, managed to produce a anti-arian creed?
Some heretic who thinks he can toss out a lot of claims without backing them up wrote:
4. Creed followed creed, and eventually idols were accepted as forms that we can worship God through, and Mary was exalted to be the Mother of God and worship of the saints was sanctioned.
Can he back this up?
Some heretic who thinks he can toss out a lot of claims without backing them up wrote:
5. The organized church was built on top of these creeds. The creeds were and are the foundation for many of today’s churches/denominations. These denominations are different to the Body of Christ spoken of in the scriptures. This shows us that most denominations are still rooted in a creed and in particular the Trinity Doctrine. Most denominations still have the Trinity Doctrine as a foundation and this doctrine originally came from Babylon.
Interestingly most of what he writes here is true, but then – at the end – he comes with his ‘Babylon’ idea. Can he back this up?
Some heretic who thinks he can toss out a lot of claims without backing them up wrote:
6. The mother of these denominations the Roman Catholic Church murdered approximately 50 million people, had armies and banned access to scripture to Christians. This time is known today as the Dark Ages.
Can he back this up?
Some heretic who thinks he can toss out a lot of claims without backing them up wrote:
7. Some relief came during the Reformation where the teachings and authority of the Catholic Church were challenged. The Reformation restored many truths back to the Body of Christ.
Yet they failed to toss out the Trinity.
Some heretic who thinks he can toss out a lot of claims without backing them up wrote:
8. As a result many new denominations started up and unfortunately they held onto some of the creeds and in particular the Trinity Doctrine.
Oh, the humaity!
.)
