https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arian ism >Arianism, in Chr

>if there is a Son and there's a Father, then the Son MUST be below the Father

The ancient greek religion had it the other way around, so I don't see why it has to be dad>son, and not son>dad or son=dad. An omnipotent being should be able to create an equal or greater being, the real mystery is why he would create lesser beings.

>>2683759
well it's related to the fact that in the canonical gospels Jesus repeatedly says he's lesser than the Father

>>2683789
That's just showing humility, it can't be assumed that he meant it literally.

I and the Father are one." (John 10:30)

>>2683791
wut

>>2683799
Jesus, being a humble sort, says he is lesser than his father but it doesn't mean he really is. He'd probably say he was lesser than Joseph and Mary too, that's just par for the course when it comes to being humble.

>>2683789
him saying it doesn't mean that the Son MUST be below the Father, it only means that it happens to be that way, not necessarily due to a prerequisite of the father son relationship.

"But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. (Mark 13:32)

>>2683809
except that he gives a specific instance where he is lesser than the Father: he has less knowledge of the future. Jesus said only the Father knows when the end of days will be, thus Jesus, part of your omnipotent, omniscient Godhead, is by his own words not omniscient

>>2683827
But only Jesus has the knowledge of human experience that the Father implicitly lacks, having never been human. Thus neither is omniscient but collectively they may be considered as such.

>>2683837
if "human experience" in a human body is required to be omniscient then they still aren't collectively omniscient, as they haven't lived as a dog, rabbit, tapeworm, etc

>>2683843
I have no idea if they have tried all those animals out yet, but if not then you're right and they aren't omniscient. I mean it stands to reason that if they never sin then they lack that knowledge as well, so true omniscience may be impossible.

>>2683809
Sounds like doublethink

>>2683846
I'm surprised you yielded this easily on the dogma of omniscience but rely on the trinity to reinterpret Jesus's words to say something other than the most obvious meaning

>>2683865
>dogma of omniscience
I'm not catholic so I'm not familiar with this dogma ( I assume its a catholic one)
And I don't see how Arianism is the most obvious meaning, if Jesus states he is lesser in one case regarding knowledge of the future it doesn't follow that he is below his father in all cases like the OP implies. The Son and Father may have different qualities without the Son being below the Father in the hierarchy.

File: jolly old heretic puncher.jpg (315KB, 1000x1420px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 1000x1420px

>>2683745
*blocks your path*