• Gus Lamarch
    348
    Atenism, refers to a religion and the religious changes associated with the ancient Egyptian Eighteenth Dynasty pharaoh Akhenaten. The religion centered on the cult of the god Aten, the disc of the Sun and originally an aspect of the traditional solar deity Ra. In the 14th century BC, Atenism was Egypt's state religion for about 20 years.

    Amenhotep IV - future Akhenaten - initially introduced Atenism in the fifth year of his reign - 1348/1346 BC -, raising Aten to the status of supreme god, initially permitting continued worship of the traditional gods. Later Akhenaten forbade the worship of other gods, a radical departure from the centuries of Egyptian religious practice. In the ninth year of his reign - 1344/1342 BC -, Akhenaten declared a more radical version of his new religion, declaring Aten not merely the supreme god of the Egyptian pantheon but the only God of Egypt, with himself as the sole intermediary between the Aten and the Egyptian people. Key features of Atenism included a ban on idols and other images of the Aten, with the exception of a rayed solar disc in which the rays - commonly depicted ending in hands - appear to represent the unseen spirit of Aten.

    Aten was addressed by Akhenaten in prayers, such as the Great Hymn to the Aten:

    "O sole God beside whom there is none"

    Aten's name is also written differently after the ninth year of the Pharaoh's rule to emphasise the radicalism of the new regime. Aten, instead of being written with the symbol of a rayed solar disc, now became spelled phonetically. The exclusion of all but one god and the prohibition of idols was a radical departure from Egyptian tradition, but most scholars see Akhenaten as a practitioner of monolatry rather than monotheism, as he did not actively deny the existence of other gods.

    Because of the monolatristic or monotheistic character of Atenism, a link to Judaism has been suggested by various writers. For example, psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud assumed Akhenaten to be the pioneer of monotheistic religion and Moses as Akhenaten's follower in his book Moses and Monotheism - Basing his arguments on his belief that the Exodus story was historical, Freud argued that Moses had been an Atenist priest who was forced to leave Egypt with his followers after Akhenaten's death. Freud argued that Akhenaten was striving to promote monotheism, something which the biblical Moses was able to achieve. Freud commented on the connection between Adonai - one of the names given to the Jewish god by the jewish tribes -, the Egyptian Aten and the Syrian divine name of Adonis as the primeval unity of languages between the factions -.

    It is widely accepted that there are strong stylistic similarities between Akhenaten's Great Hymn to the Aten and the Biblical Psalm 104:

    Hymn to Aten:

    " 1. O Sole God beside whom there is none!
    2. How many are your deeds... You made the earth as you wished, you alone, All peoples, herds, and flocks.
    3. When you set in western lightland, Earth is in darkness as if in death.
    4. Every lion comes from its den.
    5. When you have dawned they live, When you set they die;
    6. You set every man in his place. You supply their needs; Everyone has his food.
    7. The fish in the river dart before you, Your rays are in the midst of the sea.
    8. Birds fly from their nests, Their wings greeting your ka.
    9. He makes waves on the mountain like the sea, To drench their fields and their towns."


    Psalm 104:

    "1. O YHWH my God you are very great!
    2. O YHWH, how manifold are your works! In wisdown you have made them all; the earth is full of your creatures.
    3. You make darkness, and it is night, when all the animals of the forest come creeping out.
    4. The young lions roar for their prey, when the sun rises, they withdraw, and lie down in their dens.
    5. When you hide your face, they are dismayed; when you take away their breath, they die.
    6. These all look to you to give them their food in due season.
    7. Yonder is the sea, great and wide, creeping things innumerable are there.
    8. By the streams the birds of the air have their habitation; they sing among the branches.
    9. You make springs gush forth in the valleys; they flow between the hills... The trees of YHWH are watered abundantly."


    Should we consider Judaism, and consequently, Christianity and Islam "Akhenatenic" rather than "Abrahamic" religions?
  • Hanover
    5.7k
    Should we consider Judaism, and consequently, Christianity and Islam "Akhenatenic" rather than "Abrahamic" religions?Gus Lamarch

    First, thank you for this post. It's interesting.

    My thought is that it is not controversial that there were precursors to Judaism. There are many biblical passages and stories that reflect similar beliefs and accounts within the geographic region. There's also good argument that Judaism did not begin as a monotheistic religion, but that it evolved into one over time. In Exodus, the plagues do not appear to have been levied to prove to the Egyptians that there is a single god, but they were being shown to prove that Yahweh was the strongest of all the gods.

    That being said, I don't think we can say Judaism is Akhenatenic simply because bits and pieces of that religion pre-dated Judaism and might have been adopted by Judaism. The Abrahamic religions refer to an actual Abraham and officially declare a link back to him. I do think there are common roots within all the religions of the Near East, but I don't see the link between Akhenaten and Judaism to be strong enough to proclaim that Christianity is an offspring of it. The links between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, though, are undeniable.

    I'd also argue, by the way, that Christianity isn't monotheistic, but that it speaks of a trinity that references 3 distinct gods and no amount of mental gymnastics can make the concept of the triunity coherent. That is to say, while I think Christianity is Abrahamic, I don't think it's Akhenatenic, at least to the extent you use that religion to represent monotheism.
  • Gus Lamarch
    348
    I don't think we can say Judaism is Akhenatenic simply because bits and pieces of that religion pre-dated Judaism and might have been adopted by Judaism. The Abrahamic religions refer to an actual Abraham and officially declare a link back to him. I do think there are common roots within all the religions of the Near East, but I don't see the link between Akhenaten and Judaism to be strong enough to proclaim that Christianity is an offspring of it.Hanover

    In the academic field of religions, perhaps we could classify the Abrahamic religions - when, and if stronger evidence of the link between Atenism and Judaism is found - as being a direct branch of what characteristics make up "God" - Jesus, Allah, YHWH -.

    I'd also argue, by the way, that Christianity isn't monotheistic, but that it speaks of a trinity that references 3 distinct gods and no amount of mental gymnastics can make the concept of the triunity coherent.Hanover

    Trinity is not coherent, but this is a discussion for another time.

    That is to say, while I think Christianity is Abrahamic, I don't think it's Akhenatenic, at least to the extent you use that religion to represent monotheism.Hanover

    Egyptologist and archeologist Donald B. Redford have likened some aspects of Akhenaten's relationship with the Aten to the relationship, in Christian tradition, between Jesus Christ and God. Quoting him:

    "After all, Akhenaten did call himself the son of the sole god: 'Thine only son that came forth from thy body'."

    Akhenaten's case may have directly - through Judaism - influenced the emphasis which Christianity placed on the heavenly father and son relationship. Akhenaten described himself as being "thy son who came forth from thy limbs", "thy child", "the eternal son that came forth from the Sun-Disc", and "thine only son that came forth from thy body". The close relationship between father and son is such that only the king truly knows the heart of "his father", and in return his father listens to his son's prayers. He is his father's image on earth, and as Akhenaten is king on earth, his father is king in heaven. As high priest, prophet, king and divine he claimed the central position in the new religious system. Because only he knew his father's mind and will, Akhenaten alone could interpret that will for all mankind with true teaching coming only from him.

    In resume:

    We should - eventually - categorize the Abrahamic religions as being from the branch of "Akhenatenism" on the basis of the direct characteristics that formulate the concept of "God":

    All-powerful;
    Omniscient;
    Omnipresent;
    Contact with humanity through a vehicle in wich he could be comprehended - Atenism case = Akhenaten, Judaism case = Revelations, Christianity = Jesus -;
    etc...
  • Hanover
    5.7k
    The question related to the influence of the Akhenaten religion upon Judaism is a historical one. Wiki dates Akhenaten to 1353 BCE to 1334 BCE. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akhenaten . Judaism is dated as far back as 1950 BCE.

    https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-birth-and-evolution-of-judaism.

    But what is interesting about this article (and it's from a Jewish source) is that it acknowledges that pre-Mosaic Judaism (1950 BCE to 1300 BCE) was polytheistic, placing the origin of its monotheism post Exodus, which would land it squarely in the 1300 BCE time period. That means you do have the monotheism of Akhenaten occurring at the same time as it first appears in Judaism.

    The question then is whether Akhenaten influenced Judaism because we know that the two religions were practiced in geographically close proximity and they both maintained a similar emergence of monotheism at roughly the same time. To that direct question, I found:

    “Israelite monotheism developed through centuries of discussion, declarations of faith and interactions with other societies and other beliefs,” Fagan writes. “In contrast, Akhenaten’s monotheism developed very largely at the behest of a single, absolute monarch presiding over an isolated land, where the pharaoh’s word was divine and secular law. It was an experiment that withered on the vine.”

    https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/ancient-cultures/ancient-near-eastern-world/akhenaten-and-moses/

    This article argues, and I think persuasively, that you can see a gradual shift in Judaism toward monotheism over time, which seems to indicate an evolution of a belief system, as opposed to what existed with Akhenaten, which was a sudden, new idea.

    All of this also leaves a technical quibble. In your OP, you asked if Islam, Judaism, and Christianity would best be called Akhenatenic as opposed to Abrahamic. I'd say not because the Abraham story pre-dates the Akhenaten monotheism by possibly as much as 600 years. The origin of the 3 major religions clearly pre-dates Akhenaten and they all attribute Abraham as their paternal forefather.

    The best you can say, even though I don't think the historical record supports it, is that Akhenaten's new monotheistic theology influenced the evolving Judaic theology of the time. I'd think it a stretch to say Akhenaten was its true forefather.
  • Gus Lamarch
    348
    All of this also leaves a technical quibble. In your OP, you asked if Islam, Judaism, and Christianity would best be called Akhenatenic as opposed to Abrahamic. I'd say not because the Abraham story pre-dates the Akhenaten monotheism by possibly as much as 600 years. The origin of the 3 major religions clearly pre-dates Akhenaten and they all attribute Abraham as their paternal forefather.Hanover

    Yeah, this information clearly ends the discussion about if the Abrahamic religion could be categorized as Akhenatenic by historical standarts. Thank you for bringing this up.

    Akhenaten's new monotheistic theology influenced the evolving Judaic theology of the time.Hanover

    As you said yourself, there are still no historical records to support the theory that the characteristics of the Abrahamic monostatic god have not been taken completely from Akhenaten's version of Aten, but there is neither proof that it didn't influence the religions. The theological question still remains. I could even say that the religious iconography of Atenism influenced the judaic-christian iconography.

    Akhenten adoring Aten:

    800px-La_salle_dAkhenaton_%281356-1340_av_J.C.%29_%28Mus%C3%A9e_du_Caire%29_%282076972086%29.jpg

    See the representation that Akhenaten intended to convey with his relationship with Aten. He - Akhenaten - worships and adores God - Aten - for he is the son of God. I very much doubt that in this period the concept of hypostasis - which was used extensively by Christianity - was if even an idea, that is why Akhenaten placed himself below Aten, and not as an equal to him- Aten -.

    Aten was represented by a Disc - halo - in the sky with arms reaching out:

    250px-Aten.svg.png

    Christianity - through Judaism - would evolve this concept, causing the son to become God together and co-equal with the father. For this reason, iconography brings together both concepts - mortal man, next to the divine - the father - who now was also part of the divine -.

    240px-ChristAsSol.jpg

    Early 4th century iconography of Jesus Christ - notice the disc with the arms reaching out from the head of Jesus -.

    Again I quote Redford:

    "The close relationship between father and son is such that only the king truly knows the heart of "his father", and in return his father listens to his son's prayers. He is his father's image on earth, and as Akhenaten is king on earth, his father is king in heaven."

    I still maintain my position that in at least the theological characteristics of what makes up God in the abrahamic religions, the influence of Akhenaten's religion was direct or at least indirect.
  • Hanover
    5.7k
    Aten was represented by a Disc - halo - in the sky with arms reaching out:Gus Lamarch

    That looks like the sun. Regardless, the picture is ambiguous in meaning and any conclusions drawn are speculative.

    In any event, I was never under the impression that Akhenaten's religion was overly influential, but more that it was something that sprung forth for a very short period of time and then fizzled out. The time period of this belief is noted to be between 1353 BCE to 1334 BCE, which is 19 years. That's hardly much of a religious movement, especially compared to Judaism, which had already been around 600 years at this point. The importance of Akhenaten is that it is a pre-Judaic instance of monotheism questioning Judaism's claim that it was the first monotheistic religion.

    The concept of monotheism seems to be a reasonable consequence of a thought process that attempts to interject more and more powerful deities. It starts off as having a variety of gods with different powers that all do battle with one another, to there then being one god that is more powerful than all the rest, usually with each nation proclaiming themselves to be protected by a most powerful god, then finally with someone saying that they have identified the one true god and that all others are unholy. Then to cap off everything they then create a a sacred document that states as its most critical rule "thou shalt not have any other gods before me."
    Christianity - through Judaism - would evolve this concept, causing the son to become God together and co-equal with the father. For this reason, iconography brings together both concepts - mortal man, next to the divine - the father - who now was also part of the divine -.Gus Lamarch

    This interjection of Christianity into the mix seems far fetched. I really don't follow how you see a child of God based religion to flow from the Akhenaten concept that predated it by over 1000 years, so maybe better explain that.
  • Noble Dust
    3.9k
    Fascinating stuff; thanks.
  • Noble Dust
    3.9k

    Do you know of any book form histories on Judaism along this vein?
  • Hanover
    5.7k
    Trinity is not coherent, but this is a discussion for another time.Gus Lamarch
    Christianity - through Judaism - would evolve this concept, causing the son to become God together and co-equal with the father.Gus Lamarch

    This is part of where your link from Akhenaten to Christianity becomes difficult for me to follow. The Akhenaten religion is being used as support by you that Judaism arose from it based upon their similar monotheistic views. My point is that I don't see Christianity as monotheistic, but I view it as polytheistic, having 3 distinct gods. The way Christianity avoids this criticism of polytheism is by devising a triunity theory that claims that while there are 3 descriptors of God, they all are one. You have rejected the trinity theory as incoherent, which means I don't follow how you can say that Christianity arises from the monotheism of Akhenaten when Christianity is not monotheistic.

    I guess my direct question to you is whether you see Christianity as monotheistic, and, if you do, how do you conclude that if you reject the triunity theory?

    For the sake of completeness, I'd also point out that where I use "Christianity," I remove Mormonism from that because the Mormons do not believe in the triunity theory, but consider it to be a flawed theory created from scratch by the Catholic church. The Mormons believe the father, the son, and the holy ghost are three distinct entities and don't seem worried about its polytheistic implications.
  • Hanover
    5.7k
    Do you know of any book form histories on Judaism along this vein?Noble Dust

    I was just looking on Amazon, and I came across this book. I've not read it, but I ordered it. The author's theory is that Moses and Akhenaten are one in the same person. Seems like nonsense, but the reviewers thought his theory interesting.

    https://www.amazon.com/Moses-Akhenaten-Secret-History-Exodus/dp/1591430046/ref=sr_1_7?dchild=1&keywords=Akhenaten&qid=1600261762&sr=8-7#customerReviews
  • Gus Lamarch
    348
    This interjection of Christianity into the mix seems far fetched. I really don't follow how you see a child of God based religion to flow from the Akhenaten concept that predated it by over 1000 years, so maybe better explain that.Hanover

    My assumption is that through the direct or indirect influence of Akhenaten's religion, through Judaism, certain characteristic aspects of what made up God - here referring to the Abrahamic God - and his iconography persisted from Akhenaten's time until the advent of Christianity . Ideas last for an unimaginable time, however, with the mixture of cultures and localized cults, they are shaped to something diferently. Obviously, the concept of God for the Jews of the first century was completely different from the concept of Akhenaten, however, some basic characteristics, which support all other more complex ones, are there in the structure of the religion.

    I guess my direct question to you is whether you see Christianity as monotheistic, and, if you do, how do you conclude that if you reject the triunity theory?Hanover

    The Catholic canonical faith is quite explicit in the question of how God manifests himself through three different persons. The position of the Catholic Church declared in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), is again stated in the following pronouncement of the Vatican Council:

    "The Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church believes and confesses that there is one, true, living God, Creator and Lord of heaven and earth, omnipotent, eternal, immense, incomprehensible, infinite in intellect and will, and in every perfection; who, although He is one, singular, altogether simple and unchangeable spiritual substance, must be proclaimed distinct in reality and essence from the world; most blessed in Himself and of Himself, and ineffably most high above all things which are or can be conceived outside Himself."

    In question of the trinity, these are the words of the Athanasian Creed: "the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God."

    God, being omnipotent, to feel and live as a mortal, became mortal - through Jesus - however, Jesus was a distinct person but united in essence to God, who after creating himself mortal, was now the Father. God the Holy Spirit was conceived of God's divine will to become Man, so we have 3 persons of God:

    The Holy Spirit - his will as finite -, The Son - his mortal incarnation - and The Father - His divine version, conceived by us mortals -.

    For a better understanding, here is an illustration of the relationship of the trinity with God:

    Who-Invented-the-Trinity-Doctrine-.jpg

    "The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" are not names for different parts of God, but one name for God because three persons exist in God as one entity."

    In most cases, people don't get the concept of the trinity because they forget that God is omnipotent, he made himself Mortal, and he made himself Will because he can and wanted to. God "Is"
  • Noble Dust
    3.9k


    I've seen that image of the trinity plenty of times before, but looking at it now, it reminds me of the Sefirot...I wonder if there was any connection there. Just thinking out loud.
  • Noble Dust
    3.9k


    Looks interesting. I was asking about something more akin to the link you provided; I'm a novice to the actual history of Judaism in general, so I gobbled that link up and was interested in a longer form version if one exists.
  • Gus Lamarch
    348
    SefirotNoble Dust

    As Kabbalah is a school of thought of jewish mysticism, I have no doubt that this has been adapted to christian philosophy and theology. But direct connection, I don't think so.
  • Noble Dust
    3.9k


    Visually the diagram is essentially the same. I guess I’m not sure of the origin of the trinity image. I’m not familiar with much in the way of documented kabbalistic influence on Christianity... but maybe it exists somewhere?
  • Hanover
    5.7k
    In most cases, people don't get the concept of the trinity because they forget that God is omnipotent, he made himself Mortal, and he made himself Will because he can and wanted to. God "IsGus Lamarch

    People don't get the concept of the trinity because it is incomprehensible, and the Catholic Church admits as much.

    "On this subject of its incomprehensibility, the Catholic Catechism has this to say: “The Trinity is a mystery of faith in the strict sense, one of the “mysteries that are hidden in God, which can never be known unless they are revealed by God.” It goes on to say: God’ s “inmost Being as Holy Trinity is a mystery that is inaccessible to reason alone or even to Israel’s faith before the Incarnation of God’s Son and the sending of the Holy Spirit."

    https://salisburycatholics.org/holy-trinity#:~:text=On%20this%20subject%20of%20its%20incomprehensibility%2C%20the%20Catholic,be%20known%20unless%20they%20are%20revealed%20by%20God.%E2%80%9D

    The fact that there are 3 separate entities that admittedly cannot be understood by the human mind to exist as a single unit while being 3 is sufficient enough for me to declare the concept meaningless and therefore declare Christianity polytheistic.

    Tri-Unity is logically contradictory on its face, as it means 1 is 3.
  • Hanover
    5.7k
    Looks interesting. I was asking about something more akin to the link you provided; I'm a novice to the actual history of Judaism in general, so I gobbled that link up and was interested in a longer form version if one exists.Noble Dust

    The Catholic trinity doctrine traces itself back to 1215. The Zohar was printed in the late 1200s, so it post dates it. I don't see the similarities, especially considering the trinity issue would not have a problem for Jewish theology because there is no trinity in Judaism.
  • Gus Lamarch
    348
    Tri-Unity is logically contradictory on its face, as it means 1 is 3.Hanover

    In Trinitarian doctrine, God exists as three persons or hypostases, but is one being, having a single divine nature. The members of the Trinity are co-equal and co-eternal, one in essence, nature, power, action, and will. As stated in the Athanasian Creed, the Father is uncreated, the Son is uncreated, and the Holy Spirit is uncreated, and all three are eternal without beginning.

    You're getting it wrong - as most people do -. Its not "1 is 3" but that the "3 proceeds from the 1". Its not like God is 1 and 3 at the same time, God made himself into 3 to become mortal, but his essence - and He - still is 1.

    According to the Eleventh Council of Toledo (675):

    "For, when we say: He who is the Father is not the Son, we refer to the distinction of persons; but when we say: the Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, and the Holy Spirit that which the Father is and the Son is, this clearly refers to the nature or substance"

    The Catholic trinity doctrine traces itself back to 1215.Hanover

    Did you simply ignore the fact that I stated the Athanasian creed about the trinity - The Athanasian Creed was written in the early 6th century -?
  • Gus Lamarch
    348
    I’m not familiar with much in the way of documented kabbalistic influence on Christianity...Noble Dust

    Neither do I.
  • Gus Lamarch
    348
    The Athanasian Creed - in Latin and in English -:

    Latin Version:

    "Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem: Quam nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit, absque dubio in aeternum peribit. Fides autem catholica haec est: ut unum Deum in Trinitate, et Trinitatem in unitate veneremur. Neque confundentes personas, neque substantiam separantes. Alia est enim persona Patris alia Filii, alia Spiritus Sancti: Sed Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti una est divinitas, aequalis gloria, coeterna maiestas. Qualis Pater, talis Filius, talis [et] Spiritus Sanctus. Increatus Pater, increatus Filius, increatus [et] Spiritus Sanctus. Immensus Pater, immensus Filius, immensus [et] Spiritus Sanctus. Aeternus Pater, aeternus Filius, aeternus [et] Spiritus Sanctus. Et tamen non tres aeterni, sed unus aeternus. Sicut non tres increati, nec tres immensi, sed unus increatus, et unus immensus. Similiter omnipotens Pater, omnipotens Filius, omnipotens [et] Spiritus Sanctus. Et tamen non tres omnipotentes, sed unus omnipotens. Ita Deus Pater, Deus Filius, Deus [et] Spiritus Sanctus. Et tamen non tres dii, sed unus est Deus. Ita Dominus Pater, Dominus Filius, Dominus [et] Spiritus Sanctus. Et tamen non tres Domini, sed unus [est] Dominus. Quia, sicut singillatim unamquamque personam Deum ac Dominum confiteri christiana veritate compellimur: Ita tres Deos aut [tres] Dominos dicere catholica religione prohibemur. Pater a nullo est factus: nec creatus, nec genitus. Filius a Patre solo est: non factus, nec creatus, sed genitus. Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio: non factus, nec creatus, nec genitus, sed procedens. Unus ergo Pater, non tres Patres: unus Filius, non tres Filii: unus Spiritus Sanctus, non tres Spiritus Sancti. Et in hac Trinitate nihil prius aut posterius, nihil maius aut minus: Sed totae tres personae coaeternae sibi sunt et coaequales. Ita, ut per omnia, sicut iam supra dictum est, et unitas in Trinitate, et Trinitas in unitate veneranda sit. Qui vult ergo salvus esse, ita de Trinitate sentiat.

    Sed necessarium est ad aeternam salutem, ut incarnationem quoque Domini nostri Iesu Christi fideliter credat. Est ergo fides recta ut credamus et confiteamur, quia Dominus noster Iesus Christus, Dei Filius, Deus [pariter] et homo est. Deus [est] ex substantia Patris ante saecula genitus: et homo est ex substantia matris in saeculo natus. Perfectus Deus, perfectus homo: ex anima rationali et humana carne subsistens. Aequalis Patri secundum divinitatem: minor Patre secundum humanitatem. Qui licet Deus sit et homo, non duo tamen, sed unus est Christus. Unus autem non conversione divinitatis in carnem, sed assumptione humanitatis in Deum. Unus omnino, non confusione substantiae, sed unitate personae. Nam sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est homo: ita Deus et homo unus est Christus. Qui passus est pro salute nostra: descendit ad inferos: tertia die resurrexit a mortuis. Ascendit ad [in] caelos, sedet ad dexteram [Dei] Patris [omnipotentis]. Inde venturus [est] judicare vivos et mortuos. Ad cujus adventum omnes homines resurgere habent cum corporibus suis; Et reddituri sunt de factis propriis rationem. Et qui bona egerunt, ibunt in vitam aeternam: qui vero mala, in ignem aeternum. Haec est fides catholica, quam nisi quisque fideliter firmiterque crediderit, salvus esse non poterit."


    English Version:

    "Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite. So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity; to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion; to say, There are three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid; the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, let him thus think of the Trinity.

    Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Substance [Essence] of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Substance [Essence] of his Mother, born in the world. Perfect God; and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father as touching his Manhood. Who although he is God and Man; yet he is not two, but one Christ. One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh; but by assumption of the Manhood into God. One altogether; not by confusion of Substance [Essence]; but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man; so God and Man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation; descended into hell; rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty, from whence he will come to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies; And shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire. This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved."
  • Noble Dust
    3.9k


    I'm just looking at the imagery itself; it's very similar.

    640px-Tree_of_life_bahir_Hebrew.svg.png?1600307627492
  • Gus Lamarch
    348
    I'm just looking at the imagery itself; it's very similar.Noble Dust

    Its real similar.

    As the Kabbalah was founded during the 13th century, It is not doubtful that they probably drew much inspiration from christian theology and philosophy - which was at its apex -.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.