When did you lads realize the Christian God is the plebbed-down

>>8645729
Anyone who has read Plato knows this, you retard

WHOA
Plato was really smart, huh

>>8645729

The Christian God is a set of different lesser aspects of the pantheistic God. The Bible itself basically comes out and says so, but anyone who has studied and made use of the esoteric knows this very well. Io Pan!

>>8645729
>and, in my humble opinion, is the finest of philosophical realizations
>calling your philosphical realization the finest of philosophical realizations
wew lad

Which dialogues do you suggest about this?

>>8645729
To an extent, sorta depends, yannow?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Aquinas#Nature_of_God

i am not sure that plato's form of the good is a personality and also that it created the world...

>>8645792
Hence the plebbed-down remark, my dear.

>>8645855
disgusting

>>8645765
That is far from true, lad; equating God with what Plato refers to as the demiurge is much more common.

>>8645729
When did you realize that the concept of "God" is real and only the words to describe it just change in all the world's ancient literature and religious texts

>>8645729
No shit, Plato (and Aristotle) were very influential for a lot of people, including the two most important theologians: Augustine & Aquinas.

This is not new, read more and stop trying to /lit/'s validation. It makes you look like a turbo-pseud

>>8645774
That's a Chinese lie.

If Plato were alive today posting on /lit/ you'd all call him an idiot.

>>8646032
Anon, we wouldn't even notice the difference.

File: 1415554917131.jpg (194KB, 636x580px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 636x580px

can we consider that the form of the good is a conception close to the holy spirit?

File: n.jpg (222KB, 600x696px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 600x696px

And Jesus is the poor man's Socrates, yes, yes, we've been through that already.

>>8646039
I hath lain a geas on thou to return whence you came.

Plato had clever comebacks and decent answers, but he was very inconsistent. A bad philosopher

>>8645985
and who is to say that any description of god in ancient literature and religious texts is super accurate

like if i said some car in the distance is red and smells like poo makes it true when in truth it is red but doesn't smell like poo but i have no means of finding that out for myself (because i am locked in a cage). does that also invalidate what i said about it being red?

that's how people argue against the existence of god using scripture and it makes me laugh.

File: vector_field_implosion.png (14KB, 327x324px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 327x324px

>plebbed-down version

Just the version they can contemplate from the position of their lower Form. Different fingers pointing at the same thing.

>>8646024
Now you're either implying Augustine and Aquinas wrote the bible (which, as we all know, is nonsense) or your message is of no positive contribution to the discussion at all - in which case it must also be classified as nonsense. This, I am afraid, must lead to the conclusion that you are absolutely the last person on this board to call someone a turbo-pseud, lad.

>>8646102
Protestantism was a mistake.

>>8646102
the bible doesn't even mention trinity, i dunno how one can be a christian, ignoring the church fathers and putting sola scripture principle to the extreme

>>8646099
Surely you're right. Now of course even
>plebbed down version
and
>the version they can contemplate from the position of their lower Form
are different fingers pointing at the same thing. I chose the former, in order to accommodate the interests of the plebs on the board (some of which, as you must have noticed, have already found their way to the thread).

>>8646123
How canst thou forsake thine sacred qvest, O sir Kitkin sodomite?

>>8646107
Certainly, lad. But this, we must now admit, goes for Christianity in general. All that is good is easily corrupted.

>>8646142
Good cannot be corrupted.

If it was corrupted, it was not good.

Haven't you been paying attention?

>>8646147
Not the good itself, of course, but every flawed ideology claimed to be modeled upon it certainly deserves to be called just that.

>>8645729
If you consider that "the finest of philosophical realizations," your opinion is indeed humble.

>>8645855
By what criteria is it plebbed down?

>>8646255
The two aren't related in the way you think they are. You may want to take the ambiguity of 'fine' into consideration next time.

>>8645970
>>8645781
>>8645729
calling someone 'lad' has become the equivalent of the reddit 'good sir'