Edward Feser fraud.

[Reflex]

From my understanding he is trying to define the god concept separate from the abrahamic traditions we have that do describe the concept.

Maybe so, but it's classical theism nonetheless.

The other huge problem I see from him, is what he says could apply to El or Yahweh or Baal, or Asherah. Or any of the known deities that exist to date.

The name is unimportant. What is important is the idea that God, as understood in classical theism, is a radical departure from the idea that God is some sort of magical entity alongside other beings, a being like us only larger.

The trinity concept actually unfolded over hundreds of years, so we have a pretty good grasp of its evolution.

That might be, but what was the impetus? I's suggesting the impetus was to make sense of divine simplicity.

More then anything by my opinion, it was a way to keep monotheism while actually worshipping the multiple deity concepts that made up the man made doctrine.

That's just an assumption.

The God concept had to be defined as to the relationship of Jesus with the Father. There were to many competing ideas and Constantine wanted a unified religion for his nation.

Trinitarianism is hardly new, going back in Hinduism long before Jesus. Siva, Vishnu and Brahma are manifestations of the singular Brahman. This is not unlike Christianity's idea of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The aim is the same: to answer the problem of how the many is derived from the One. For Christians, the desire was to formulate an understanding of divine simplicity, borrowed from Plotinus' idea of the One, in the context of Jesus being the incarnation of the "intellectual principle." From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

The three basic principles of Plotinus' metaphysics are called by him ‘the One’ (or, equivalently, ‘the Good’), Intellect, and Soul. These principles are both ultimate ontological realities and explanatory principles. Plotinus believed that they were recognized by Plato as such, as well as by the entire subsequent Platonic tradition.​

 

[outhouse]

For Christians, the desire was to formulate an understanding of divine simplicity,

No. Christians had multiple views on the subject, and none agreed.

The desire was Constantine's alone to form a unified Christianity

 

[outhouse]

Plotinus believed that they were recognized by Plato as such, as well as by the entire subsequent Platonic tradition.

The foundation to the trinity was laid in Pauls time with father and son.

It evolved forward and by 200CE the concept was being thrown around in its primitive form by people that placed Christian theology over many philosophical options.

 

[Gambit]

Classical theism is the conception of God that has prevailed historically within Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Western philosophical theism generally. Its religious roots are biblical, and its philosophical roots are to be found in the Neoplatonic and Aristotelian traditions.

This is factually correct statement.

Classical theism is, historically, the mainstream view in philosophy and is associated with the tradition of writers like Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, Augustine, St. Anselm, Maimonides, Averroes and Thomas Aquinas.[2]

(source: Wikipedia: Classical theism)

 

[Gambit]

Many philosophers and theist are very critical of Feser and disagree whole hearted with his own definition.

Feser is a Thomist. Thomism is the de facto philosophy of Catholicism.

 

[Reflex]

No. Christians had multiple views on the subject, and none agreed.

The desire was Constantine's alone to form a unified Christianity

The foundation to the trinity was laid in Pauls time with father and son.

It evolved forward and by 200CE the concept was being thrown around in its primitive form by people that placed Christian theology over many philosophical options.

I see no reason to object to either post.

Even if Constantine's "vision" was politically motivated, it did serve as the means to bring together the finest mind in Europe at that time and advance religious thought. However, it would be a mistake to underestimate Plotinus' influence.

 

[outhouse]

Feser is a Thomist. Thomism is de facto philosophy of Catholicism.

That's is correct.

But its a small part. And its not accepted by all, and it came long after the original theology developed.

 

[outhouse]

However, it would be a mistake to underestimate Plotinus' influence.

Agreed whole hearted.

He had a huge influence.

 

[Gambit]

That's is correct.

But its a small part. And its not accepted by all, and it came long after the original theology developed.

The point is that the Christian tradition does not reduce to the "Bible-only."

 

[Gambit]

He is trying to redefine your god outside the text you hold sacred, yet he claims he is a theist.

Feser is a Catholic, not a Bible-only, Christian fundamentalist.

 

[outhouse]

The point is that the Christian tradition does not reduce to the "Bible-only."

Agreed

For the most part Christianity was plagiarized from the OT text, apocrypha, and pseudepigrapha combined in Hellenism with many outside influences to different degrees. But more then just the foundation is biblical, it is a majority.

And Christian tradition in itself, is a moving target.

 

[outhouse]

Feser is a Catholic, not a Bible-only, Christian fundamentalist.

He has his own definition of just that.

I don't know of any so called Christians that are bible only. Most if not all are tied to some dogma or faith outside the text.

And fundamentalism opens a whole new door, and he has a few tendencies in his work.

But no he is not a typical apologetic rhetorician.

 

[Reflex]

That's is correct.

But its a small part. And its not accepted by all, and it came long after the original theology developed.

Yes, but it's called "classical theology."

Agreed

For the most part Christianity was plagiarized from the OT text, apocrypha, and pseudepigrapha combined in Hellenism with many outside influences to different degrees. But more then just the foundation is biblical, it is a majority.

And Christian tradition in itself, is a moving target.

That is a significant point, one that I wish atheists in this forum would understand. Most here have a monochromatic, and hence a very superficial, understanding of religion and Christianity in particular.

 

[Gambit]

He has his own definition of just that.

What is your basis for alleging that Feser is misrepresenting Catholicism?

 

[outhouse]

What is your basis for alleging that Feser is misrepresenting Catholicism?

he is focusing on classical theism as a definition for the god concept

classical theism is a debate about gods nature, not a static definition one can overlay over the top of biblical text and call it primacy

 

[outhouse]

Most here have a monochromatic, and hence a very superficial, understanding of religion and Christianity in particular.

You would be surprised at how many know this here.

 

[outhouse]

Yes, but it's called "classical theology."

yes but CT also is not static and evolved

 

[Reflex]

You would be surprised at how many know this here.

Maybe, but I've seen no evidence of that being true.

yes but CT also is not static and evolved

True, but the basic premises have changed very little.

 

[outhouse]

True, but the basic premises have changed very little.

The problem here is that CT started before monotheism was fully seated by pagan worshippers, its origins were originally a debate about all gods, correct?

Before the monotheistic gods substance was debated.

 

[Gambit]

he is focusing on classical theism as a definition for the god concept.

It has already been explained to you and documented for you that classical theism (or, more precisely, Thomism) is the de facto philosophical theology of Catholicism. So, I will ask you once again: What is your basis for alleging that Edward Feser is misrepresenting Catholicism?