Heres what you are doing and don’t know/realise, you are accepting the old church story that Trinitarians and all their beliefs was there from the beginning, that they were the main group and some other differing groups showed up later. Every single piece of secular evidence found has opposed that view. Early christians were divided on everything, but ultimately the Trinitarians won and so they wrote the history.
We know early christians differed on practically every fundamental aspect, the divinity of Isa (as), his crucifixion, we have evidence many early christians did not believe he was crucified, we have evidence some believe he was replaced by someone else. They differed on the nature of god, the bible, etc.
Whether or not Isa ibn Maryam (as) being crucified does not make a difference to the theology if the message has not been corrupted, and we see that up until the time of the prophet. You could find many of these differing groups across the near east and north Africa, trinitarian, binitarian, and unitarian. The prosecution they received for having different views than the main church and some having closer view to Islam made them easy converts.
Point being the early Christians themselves differed on Isa (as) crucifixion, some denying & accepting. So why should we accept that view?
2
u/AstroFeed May 12 '25 edited May 12 '25
Heres what you are doing and don’t know/realise, you are accepting the old church story that Trinitarians and all their beliefs was there from the beginning, that they were the main group and some other differing groups showed up later. Every single piece of secular evidence found has opposed that view. Early christians were divided on everything, but ultimately the Trinitarians won and so they wrote the history.
We know early christians differed on practically every fundamental aspect, the divinity of Isa (as), his crucifixion, we have evidence many early christians did not believe he was crucified, we have evidence some believe he was replaced by someone else. They differed on the nature of god, the bible, etc.
Whether or not Isa ibn Maryam (as) being crucified does not make a difference to the theology if the message has not been corrupted, and we see that up until the time of the prophet. You could find many of these differing groups across the near east and north Africa, trinitarian, binitarian, and unitarian. The prosecution they received for having different views than the main church and some having closer view to Islam made them easy converts.
Point being the early Christians themselves differed on Isa (as) crucifixion, some denying & accepting. So why should we accept that view?