Christian Deconstruction: The Trinity is Bullshit - Here Comes The Science (Part 14)
A Visceral Deconstruction of Christianity's Most Bullshit Doctrine
The Trinity stands as Christianity's most spectacular intellectual clusterfuckโa theological abortion that demonstrates what happens when you take a sledgehammer to ancient Hebrew monotheism and try to rebuild it with Greek philosophical spare parts. This isn't just theological malpractice; it's a fucking crime scene where Hellenistic thought murdered Jewish understanding and left its rotting corpse dressed up in biblical clothes.
1. The Hebrew Foundation: One God, No Bullshit
The Hebrew Bible doesn't fuck around when it comes to monotheism. The ืฉึฐืืึทืข ืึดืฉึฐืืจึธืึตื (Shema Yisrael) in Deuteronomy 6:4 declares: ืฉึฐืืึทืข ืึดืฉึฐืืจึธืึตื ืึฐืืึธื ืึฑืึนืึตืื ืึผ ืึฐืืึธื ืึถืึธื (Shema Yisrael, YHVH Eloheinu, YHVH echad) - "Hear, O Israel: YHVH our God, YHVH is one."
That word ืึถืึธื (echad) doesn't mean "one in three" or "compound unity" or any other Christian bullshit apologetic. It means ONEโsingular, indivisible, absolute. When the Hebrew scribes wanted to express unity among multiple entities, they used words like ืึทืึทื (yachad) meaning "together" or ืึทืึทืช (achat) for feminine singular. But ืึถืึธื (echad)? That's mathematical, philosophical, and theological singularity with no wiggle room for Trinitarian mental gymnastics.
2. The Greek Invasion: When Philosophy Ass-Raped Theology
Enter the Greeks with their philosophical hard-on for complex metaphysical systems. By the 4th century CE, Christian theologians were so drunk on Platonic and Aristotelian thought that they couldn't see Hebrew scripture without Greek-tinted glasses welded to their fucking faces.
The key Greek concepts that gang-raped Hebrew monotheism include:
ฮฟแฝฯฮฏฮฑ (ousia) - "essence" or "substance" แฝฯฯฯฯฮฑฯฮนฯ (hypostasis) - "subsistence" or "person" แฝฮผฮฟฮฟฯฯฮนฮฟฯ (homoousios) - "of the same substance"
These weren't biblical categoriesโthey were philosophical constructs imported from Platonic metaphysics like intellectual contraband. The Hebrew Bible knew nothing of "persons" sharing "essence" while maintaining distinct "subsistences." This is pure Greek philosophical masturbation projected onto Jewish texts.
3. The Linguistic Shitstorm: How Translation Became Prostitution
The real intellectual rape began when Greek-thinking theologians started retrofitting Hebrew and Aramaic texts to support their philosophical fuckery.
Genesis 1:26 - ืึทืึนึผืืึถืจ ืึฑืึนืึดืื ื ึทืขึฒืฉึถืื ืึธืึธื ืึฐึผืฆึทืึฐืึตื ืึผ (Vayomer Elohim na'aseh adam b'tzalmenu) - "And God said, let us make man in our image."
Trinitarian apologists cream themselves over this plural language, but any Hebrew scholar worth their circumcision knows this is either:
Plural of majesty (pluralis majestatis) - common in ancient Near Eastern royal language
Divine council reference - God addressing the heavenly court (compare Job 1:6, 1 Kings 22:19-22)
The Hebrew never suggests three co-equal divine persons. That's pure Christian eisegesisโreading into the text what you desperately want to find rather than extracting what's actually there.
4. The Council of Nicaea: When Politics Fucked Theology
The Council of Nicaea (325 CE) was where this theological abortion was officially birthed. Emperor Constantineโa political operator who gave zero shits about theological nuanceโneeded religious unity for his empire. The result? A doctrine so philosophically convoluted it would make Rube Goldberg weep.
The Nicene formulation declares Jesus as แฝฮผฮฟฮฟฯฯฮนฮฟฯ ฯแฟท ฯฮฑฯฯฮฏ (homoousios tล patri) - "of the same substance as the Father." This wasn't based on biblical exegesis; it was philosophical compromise designed to split the difference between Arian subordinationism and Sabellian modalism.
The fucking irony? They used non-biblical Greek terminology to "preserve" biblical truth. It's like using a chainsaw to perform brain surgery while claiming you're following the Hippocratic Oath.
5. The Christological Clusterfuck: Manufacturing a God-Man
The New Testament knows nothing of the later Trinitarian formulations. When Jesus quotes the Shema in Mark 12:29, he affirms Jewish monotheism: แผฮบฮฟฯ ฮต แผธฯฯฮฑฮฎฮป ฮบฯฯฮนฮฟฯ แฝ ฮธฮตแฝธฯ แผกฮผแฟถฮฝ ฮบฯฯฮนฮฟฯ ฮตแผทฯ แผฯฯฮนฮฝ (akoue Israel kyrios ho theos hฤmลn kyrios heis estin) - "Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one."
That Greek word ฮตแผทฯ (heis) is just as singular and absolute as the Hebrew ืึถืึธื (echad). No Trinitarian wiggle room here, just straightforward monotheism that would make any rabbi proud.
6. The Johannine Literature: Mystical Poetry Becomes Systematic Theology
The Gospel of John's ฮปฯฮณฮฟฯ (logos) concept became the theological equivalent of steroids for Trinitarian development. But this ฮปฯฮณฮฟฯ wasn't the second person of an eternal Trinityโit was Jewish ืึตืึฐืจึธื (memra) theology filtered through Alexandrian Jewish thought.
แผฮฝ แผฯฯแฟ แผฆฮฝ แฝ ฮปฯฮณฮฟฯ ฮบฮฑแฝถ แฝ ฮปฯฮณฮฟฯ แผฆฮฝ ฯฯแฝธฯ ฯแฝธฮฝ ฮธฮตฯฮฝ ฮบฮฑแฝถ ฮธฮตแฝธฯ แผฆฮฝ แฝ ฮปฯฮณฮฟฯ (en archฤ ฤn ho logos kai ho logos ฤn pros ton theon kai theos ฤn ho logos) - "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1).
The critical phrase ฮธฮตแฝธฯ แผฆฮฝ แฝ ฮปฯฮณฮฟฯ lacks the definite article before ฮธฮตแฝธฯ (theos), suggesting qualitative rather than personal identity. This isn't "the Word was God" but "the Word was divine"โa significant fucking difference that later Trinitarian theology steamrolled into oblivion.
7. The Patristic Perversion: Fathers Gone Wild
The Church Fathers took this ambiguous poetic language and built an entire systematic theology that would make Aristotle shit himself with pride and Moses roll over in his grave.
Tertullian (c. 155-240 CE) coined the Latin trinitas, but his understanding was subordinationistโthe Son and Spirit were derivatives of the Father, not co-equal persons. It took centuries of philosophical masturbation to reach the Cappadocian formula of ฮผฮฏฮฑ ฮฟแฝฯฮฏฮฑ แผฮฝ ฯฯฮนฯแฝถฮฝ แฝฯฮฟฯฯฮฌฯฮตฯฮนฮฝ (mia ousia en trisin hypostasesin) - "one essence in three hypostases."
This formula is pure Greek philosophical sophistry with zero Hebrew biblical foundation. The Cappadocian FathersโBasil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Gregory of Nyssaโwere brilliant philosophers but shit biblical exegetes who imposed Platonic categories onto Semitic religious texts.
8. The Talmudic Testimony: Jews Call Bullshit
The Talmudic rabbis weren't fucking around when they identified the fundamental problem with Christian theology. Sanhedrin 38b discusses how ืึดืื ึดืื (minim) - sectarians/heretics - distort biblical language to support their theological perversions.
The rabbis understood that ืึฑืึนืึดืื (Elohim) in Genesis 1:26 was plural of majesty, not multiple divine persons. They had two millennia of Hebrew linguistic tradition backing them up, while Christians had Greek philosophy and imperial political pressure.
9. The Linguistic Evidence: Hebrew vs. Greek Mentality
Hebrew thought operates in concrete, relational categories:
ืึฐืืึธื (YHVH) - the personal, covenant name
ืึฑืึนืึดืื (Elohim) - God as powerful ruler
ืึฒืึนื ึธื (Adonai) - Lord, master
ืฉึทืืึทึผื (Shaddai) - Almighty, all-sufficient
These aren't abstract philosophical categories but relational titles describing how the one God interacts with creation. Hebrew theology is fundamentally ืึฐึผืึธืจึดืื (devarim) - word-based and covenantal, not essence-based and metaphysical.
Greek thought, however, operates in abstract philosophical categories:
ฮฟแฝฯฮฏฮฑ (ousia) - essence, what something is
แฝฯฯฯฯฮฑฯฮนฯ (hypostasis) - subsistence, how something exists
ฯฯฯฯฯฯฮฟฮฝ (prosลpon) - person, mask, role
When you force Hebrew relational theology through Greek philosophical categories, you get the Trinitarian abominationโa theological Frankenstein's monster that satisfies neither Hebrew monotheism nor Greek philosophical coherence.
10. The Johannine Comma: Textual Fraud at Its Finest
The most blatant example of Trinitarian textual manipulation is the Comma Johanneum in 1 John 5:7-8. The Trinitarian reading states: "For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one."
This passage appears in exactly ZERO Greek manuscripts before the 14th century. It's a Latin interpolationโa fucking forgery inserted to provide biblical support for the Trinity. Erasmus initially excluded it from his Greek New Testament, but Catholic pressure forced him to include it when a single (likely manufactured) Greek manuscript containing it appeared.
The authentic text reads: แฝ ฯฮน ฯฯฮตแฟฯ ฮตแผฐฯฮนฮฝ ฮฟแผฑ ฮผฮฑฯฯฯ ฯฮฟแฟฆฮฝฯฮตฯ (hoti treis eisin hoi martyrountes) - "For there are three that bear witness"โreferring to the Spirit, water, and blood as testimonies to Christ's identity, not divine persons.
11. The Patristic Clusterfuck: Arius vs. Athanasius
The Arian controversy exposed the fundamental incoherence of Trinitarian thought. Arius argued that if the Son is ฮณฮตฮฝฮฝฮทฯฯฯ (gennฤtos) - "begotten," then there was a time when he was not (แผฆฮฝ ฯฮฟฯฮต แฝ ฯฮต ฮฟแฝฮบ แผฆฮฝ - ฤn pote hote ouk ฤn). This is logically fucking airtight.
Athanasius countered with the distinction between ฮณฮตฮฝฮฝฮทฯฯฯ (gennฤtos) - "begotten" and ฯฮฟฮนฮทฯฯฯ (poiฤtos) - "made," arguing the Son was eternally begotten, not created. But this creates the logical absurdity of eternal generationโa process that is simultaneously temporal (generation) and eternal (outside time).
This isn't theological sophistication; it's philosophical word-salad designed to obscure the fundamental incoherence of claiming three persons are one God.
12. The Cappadocian Shell Game: Three Persons, One Essence
The Cappadocian solution tried to resolve this clusterfuck by distinguishing ฮฟแฝฯฮฏฮฑ (ousia) from แฝฯฯฯฯฮฑฯฮนฯ (hypostasis). They argued that the three divine persons share one divine essence while maintaining distinct personal properties:
Father: แผฮณฮตฮฝฮฝฮทฯฮฏฮฑ (agennฤsia) - unbegotten
Son: ฮณฮญฮฝฮฝฮทฯฮนฯ (gennฤsis) - begotten
Spirit: แผฮบฯฯฯฮตฯ ฯฮนฯ (ekporeusis) - procession
This is philosophical three-card monte. They're essentially saying: "We have three distinct entities who are somehow one entity, but don't worry about the logical contradiction because we're using different Greek words to describe the contradiction."
13. The Hebrew Prophetic Tradition: No Room for Trinity
The Hebrew prophets would have lost their collective shit over Trinitarian theology. Isaiah 44:6 has YHVH declaring: ืึฒื ึดื ืจึดืืฉืืึนื ืึทืึฒื ึดื ืึทืึฒืจืึนื ืึผืึดืึทึผืึฐืขึธืึทื ืึตืื ืึฑืึนืึดืื (ani rishon va'ani acharon umibal'aday ein elohim) - "I am first and I am last; besides me there is no God."
The Hebrew ืึดืึทึผืึฐืขึธืึทื (mibal'aday) means "apart from me" or "besides me"โabsolute exclusivity that leaves no room for co-equal divine persons. This isn't monotheism with fine print; it's monotheism with a fucking exclamation point.
14. The Johannine Prologue: Poetry, Not Systematic Theology
John 1:1-18 is mystical poetry expressing the relationship between divine revelation and creation, not a systematic treatise on eternal divine relations. The ฮปฯฮณฮฟฯ (logos) functions like the Hebrew ืึฐึผืึทืจ ืึฐืืึธื (davar YHVH) - "word of YHVH" that appears throughout Hebrew prophecy.
Psalm 33:6 states: ืึดึผืึฐืึทืจ ืึฐืืึธื ืฉึธืืึทืึดื ื ึทืขึฒืฉืืึผ (bidvar YHVH shamayim na'asu) - "By the word of YHVH the heavens were made." This ืึฐึผืึทืจ (davar) isn't a second divine person; it's God's creative power personifiedโa common Hebrew literary device.
15. The Gnostic Alternative: At Least They Were Honest
The Gnostic texts, while theologically problematic, at least maintained logical consistency in their cosmological speculations. The Gospel of Truth describes emanations from the divine ฯฮปฮฎฯฯฮผฮฑ (plฤrลma) - "fullness" - without claiming these emanations were simultaneously distinct from and identical to the source.
Gnostic ฮฑแผฐแฟถฮฝฮตฯ (aiลnes) - "aeons" - functioned as divine attributes or emanations without the logical contradiction of claiming they were both the same essence and different persons. They may have been wrong about material creation being evil, but at least they didn't violate the basic laws of logic while constructing their theology.
16. The Talmudic Razor: Cutting Through Christian Bullshit
Berachot 13a discusses the meaning of ืึถืึธื (echad) in the Shema, emphasizing that God's unity means ืึธืึดืื ืึธึผืขืึนืึธื (yachid ba'olam) - "unique in the world." The Talmudic understanding allows for no division, separation, or multiplication within the divine essence.
Hullin 60b warns against ืฉึฐืื ึตื ืจึฐืฉึปืืึผืึนืช (shnei reshuyot) - "two powers in heaven," which the rabbis identified as heretical dualism. The Trinity doesn't just violate this principle; it multiplies the violation by three, creating what amounts to ืฉึฐืืึนืฉึธืื ืจึฐืฉึปืืึผืึนืช (shloshah reshuyot) - "three powers in heaven."
17. The New Testament Evidence: Christ the Subordinate
Even the New Testament, despite later Trinitarian interpretation, maintains clear subordinationist language that fucks over later orthodox formulations:
1 Corinthians 11:3: ฮธฮญฮปฯ ฮดแฝฒ แฝฮผแพถฯ ฮตแผฐฮดฮญฮฝฮฑฮน แฝ ฯฮน ฯฮฑฮฝฯแฝธฯ แผฮฝฮดฯแฝธฯ แผก ฮบฮตฯฮฑฮปแฝด แฝ ฮงฯฮนฯฯฯฯ แผฯฯฮนฮฝ ฮบฮตฯฮฑฮปแฝด ฮดแฝฒ ฮณฯ ฮฝฮฑฮนฮบแฝธฯ แฝ แผฮฝฮฎฯ ฮบฮตฯฮฑฮปแฝด ฮดแฝฒ ฯฮฟแฟฆ ฮงฯฮนฯฯฮฟแฟฆ แฝ ฮธฮตฯฯ (thelล de hymas eidenai hoti pantos andros hฤ kephalฤ ho Christos estin kephalฤ de gynaikos ho anฤr kephalฤ de tou Christou ho theos) - "I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God."
1 Corinthians 15:28: แฝ ฯฮฑฮฝ ฮดแฝฒ แฝฯฮฟฯฮฑฮณแฟ ฮฑแฝฯแฟท ฯแฝฐ ฯฮฌฮฝฯฮฑ ฯฯฯฮต ฮบฮฑแฝถ ฮฑแฝฯแฝธฯ แฝ ฯ แผฑแฝธฯ แฝฯฮฟฯฮฑฮณฮฎฯฮตฯฮฑฮน ฯแฟท แฝฯฮฟฯฮฌฮพฮฑฮฝฯฮน ฮฑแฝฯแฟท ฯแฝฐ ฯฮฌฮฝฯฮฑ (hotan de hypotagฤ autล ta panta tote kai autos ho huios hypotagฤsetai tล hypotaxanti autล ta panta) - "When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will be subjected to him who subjected all things to him."
This language of แฝฯฮฟฯฮฑฮณฮฎ (hypotagฤ) - "subjection" or "subordination" - directly contradicts later claims of co-equality. You can't have co-equal persons if one is eternally subject to another.
18. The Spirit Problem: Third Wheel of Divinity
The Holy Spirit gets the worst treatment in this theological gang-bang. While the Father and Son at least get personal pronouns and relationship language, the Spirit is often described as an แผฮฝฮญฯฮณฮตฮนฮฑ (energeia) - "activity" or force.
Genesis 1:2: ืึฐืจืึผืึท ืึฑืึนืึดืื ืึฐืจึทืึถืคึถืช ืขึทืึพืคึฐึผื ึตื ืึทืึธึผืึดื (v'ruach Elohim merachefet al-pnei hamayim) - "And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters."
The Hebrew ืจืึผืึท (ruach) means "wind," "breath," or "spirit"โit's God's active power, not a distinct divine person. The verb ืึฐืจึทืึถืคึถืช (merachefet) is feminine, which creates grammatical problems for later masculine Trinitarian theology.
19. The Philosophical Incoherence: Logic's Funeral
The Trinity violates fundamental logical principles:
Law of Non-Contradiction: A cannot be both B and not-B simultaneously. If the Father is God and the Son is God, but the Father is not the Son, then either:
God = Father + Son + Spirit (Tritheism)
Father = Son = Spirit (Modalism)
The formula is logically incoherent (Bingo!)
Law of Identity: Each thing is identical to itself. If A = God, B = God, and C = God, but A โ B โ C, then the concept "God" has no stable identity.
Trinitarian theologians tried to solve this with the distinction between essentia and persona, but this just moves the logical contradiction up one level of abstraction without resolving it.
20. The Council of Constantinople: Doubling Down on Bullshit
The Council of Constantinople (381 CE) completed the Trinitarian abortion by declaring the Spirit แฝฮผฮฟฮฟฯฯฮนฮฟฯ (homoousios) with the Father and Son. This wasn't based on biblical exegesis but on the logical necessity of completing their philosophical system.
The Pneumatomachi ("Spirit-fighters") rightly pointed out that Scripture never explicitly calls the Spirit "God" with the same directness applied to the Father. The orthodox response? Theological argument from silence and philosophical necessityโexactly the kind of reasoning they'd reject in any other context.
21. The Economic vs. Immanent Trinity: Doubling the Bullshit
Later theology distinguished between:
Trinity economica - how the Trinity operates in salvation history
Trinity immanens - the eternal relations within the Godhead
This distinction attempts to preserve biblical language about divine action while maintaining philosophical speculation about eternal divine relations. It's theological having-your-cake-and-eating-it-tooโpure intellectual dishonesty designed to make an incoherent doctrine appear sophisticated.
22. The Apocryphal Silence: Even the Rejects Knew Better
The apocryphal and pseudepigraphical literature, despite its theological diversity, maintains Jewish monotheistic assumptions. 1 Enoch, Jubilees, 4 Ezra, and other Second Temple period texts know nothing of co-equal divine persons sharing essence while maintaining distinct hypostases.
Even texts that describe exalted messianic figures maintain clear distinction between the one God and elevated creatures. 1 Enoch 46-48 describes the "Son of Man" figure in exalted terms but never confuses him with the Lord of Spirits.
23. The Johannine Epistles: Subordination in Spades
1 John 4:14: ฮบฮฑแฝถ แผกฮผฮตแฟฯ ฯฮตฮธฮตฮฌฮผฮตฮธฮฑ ฮบฮฑแฝถ ฮผฮฑฯฯฯ ฯฮฟแฟฆฮผฮตฮฝ แฝ ฯฮน แฝ ฯฮฑฯแฝดฯ แผฯฮญฯฯฮฑฮปฮบฮตฮฝ ฯแฝธฮฝ ฯ แผฑแฝธฮฝ ฯฯฯแฟฯฮฑ ฯฮฟแฟฆ ฮบฯฯฮผฮฟฯ (kai hฤmeis tetheametha kai martyroumen hoti ho patฤr apestalken ton huion sลtฤra tou kosmou) - "We have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world."
The แผฯฮญฯฯฮฑฮปฮบฮตฮฝ (apestalken) - "has sent" - indicates clear subordination and distinction. Co-equal divine persons don't "send" each other; superiors send subordinates. The entire concept of ฯฮญฮผฯฯ (pempล) and แผฯฮฟฯฯฮญฮปฮปฯ (apostellล) in Johannine literature maintains this hierarchical relationship.
24. The Modern Aftermath: Intellectual Dishonesty Institutionalized
Contemporary Trinitarian theology continues this tradition of intellectual masturbation with increasingly sophisticated philosophical gymnastics. Terms like "perichoresis" (ฯฮตฯฮนฯฯฯฮทฯฮนฯ), "divine processions," and "subsistent relations" multiply like theological cancer, creating ever more complex ways to avoid admitting the doctrine is fundamentally fucked.
Modern apologists like William Lane Craig and James White perform impressive mental contortions to defend the Trinity, but they're essentially polishing a theological turd with philosophical sophistication. No amount of Greek terminology or systematic theology can transform logical incoherence into divine mystery.
Conclusion: The Verdict of History and Logic
The Trinity represents the systematic destruction of Hebrew monotheism by Greek philosophical categories imposed through imperial political pressure. It's not a biblical doctrine discovered through careful exegesis; it's a philosophical construct created to solve problems that only existed because Christians insisted on divinizing Jesus while maintaining monotheistic claims.
The Hebrew Bible, Talmudic tradition, basic logic, and careful New Testament exegesis all testify against Trinitarian formulations. What we're left with is a doctrine that:
Violates Hebrew monotheistic assumptions
Contradicts fundamental logical principles
Requires non-biblical philosophical categories
Depends on textual corruptions and eisegetical interpretation
Creates more theological problems than it solves
The Trinity isn't divine mystery; it's theological malpracticeโa fourth-century philosophical abortion that Christianity has been stuck with ever since. It stands as history's most successful example of how imperial politics, philosophical sophistication, and religious authority can collaborate to institutionalize bullshit and call it orthodoxy.
Any honest examination of the evidence leads to one inescapable conclusion: the Trinity is exactly what it appears to beโthree persons who somehow are and aren't one God, depending on which philosophical shell you're watching and how desperately you need the theology to work out. It's intellectual three-card monte played with divine categories, and after sixteen centuries, it's time to call the game for what it is: an elaborate theological con job that wouldn't fool a first-year philosophy student if it weren't backed by centuries of institutional authority and threatened excommunication.
The Hebrew ืฉึฐืืึทืข (Shema) got it right the first time: ืึฐืืึธื ืึถืึธื (YHVH echad) - "YHVH is one." No persons, no essence, no hypostasesโjust one God who doesn't need Greek philosophical categories to make sense. Everything else is theological masturbation designed to make the incoherent appear profound.
References
JPS Hebrew-English TANAKH, Jewish Publication Society
Steinsaltz, Adin. The Talmud: The Steinsaltz Edition. New York: Random House, 1989-.
Charles, R.H., ed. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913.
Robinson, James M., ed. The Nag Hammadi Library in English. 4th ed. Leiden: Brill, 1996.
Marshall, Alfred. The Interlinear Greek-English New Testament. 4th ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012.
Kelly, J.N.D. Early Christian Doctrines. 5th ed. London: A&C Black, 1977.
Are you a real Druid Wendy, and if so, do you live in the US or the UK. If you live in the UK, have you visited Stone Henge and touched the stones.
I have, (as my birthday is on the 21st June).
The stones are unusually warm to the touch, even in cold weather. Apparently, Stone Henge is built on a Ley line hub, where 5 Ley lines meet, including the Key line that goes to the Rose Croix in Scotland.
I enjoy this series so much , factual to the core. I have had many discussions with Christians, but of course a famous quote from them is always โ Faith is the belief of things unseenโ when the discussion of Godโs existence enters the conversation ๐๐