2) No, the demiurge belief was very very weak.
The muslim sufis and the vedanta hindus have the best explanations on these matters. The 2 types of maya are far better explanations that make sense. The demiurge made no sense.
Ah, okay, you've got me convinced.
3) In no way shape or form is Jesus 'divinity', your scripture is very clear.
if God is the Gardener......how is the Vine itself, GOD?
makes no sense
Your objection is ridiculous. One True vine, one True account. The one true account is AspiringSoul, AspiringSoul is YOU. Your reaction: "How is my account ME? Doesn't make any sense."
the trinitarian doctrine holds that the Son is co-equal with the Father in Godhead...
yet Jesus said "the son can do nothing on his own"
"I am going to the Father; for he is greater than I."
in all instances, everything the Son does, is the Father acting THROUGH the Son.
hence i use the prism analogy
For the third time, the prism would be
the body of Jesus, NOT the
Christ / Logos. The Christ/Logos exists of the same light as God, because
it is God. The prism is not the light, hence not God, hence not the Christ/Logos. Where's the hypostatic union in your analogy? It's nowhere to be found.
Plus, your account can do nothing on its own / can do nothing without YOU. YOU are greater than your account. Everything your account does is YOU acting through your account so others -
who don't know you - get to know you. The fact that your account can do nothing without YOU is further proof that it
IS YOU, just as Jesus (the man/account) unable to do anything without God is further proof that He
IS GOD.
similarly the trinitarian doctrine holds the the holy spirit is co-equal with the Son and the Father, in Godhead
yet Jesus said
He will not speak on his own authority, but he will speak of what he hears and will tell you of things to come.
this clearly suggests the holy spirit cannot be co-equal with the Son or the Father...
so if i have a problem with the trinitarian doctrine i have a pretty fair argument.
Pff, you have one body, one mind, one soul. They are all YOU, they are not three different YOUS since that would imply three bodies, three minds, three souls. Your body will act and speak only because of what it is instructed to do by your mind. "Your body cannot be co-equal with your mind" would be wrongly interpreting co-equal. They all identify as YOU, without being exactly the same. And now I'm merely applying the reasoning to a finite and physical being (YOU), not to an infinite, metaphysical being (God). But if one cannot deal with abstractions of unimaginable ideas, there's no point in trying to understand.
the best explanations of the sayings of Jesus, comes from the sufis who use God's immanence to explain the manifestation of God from the pov of Gnosis.
Clearly not, since you, as an adherent, have completely removed Jesus' hypostasis from the equation, which is not something gnostics (those without whom your Sufis would have never encountered "gnosis") would have approved.
Ive explained in various ways to the christians on here that 'by gnosis im not talking about the gnostic sect' and yet in the single stroke they'll often quote me directly and tell me 'i don't want to read your GNOSTIC views'.
There's no "gnostic sect". There were dozens of them over the span of more than a millenium. Among a variety of gnostic sects there were teachings as contradictory as black and white (for instance Ophites who worshipped the serpent and Valentinians who said the serpent was evil incarnate). Gnosis was an intrinsic part of Christian doctrine before the proto-orthodox established their "true" religion in Rome by expelling partisan labelled "heterodox" teachings. Gnosis
is an essential part of Christian teachings, as even Todd (a Judaized ergo antignostic Christian) admitted.
you're talking to probably the only muslim who believes in the crucifixion/death/resurrection
...
hence your perspective of islam's position on this is blindsided by these modern contexts.
To be clear, are you saying Islam's opposition to the three pillars of Christianity (deity, death, and resurrection of Christ) are modern positions and have nothing to do with 7th century Islam?
