A banned comment on Tuggy's post in reply to Kimel's

Three Scoundrels: Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nazianzus, Gregory of Nyssa

Herebelow is a comment that I had tried to append on Dale Tuggy's post Kimel’s review of What is the Trinity – Part 1 (August 7, 2017 @ trinities.org/blog, in reply to Fr Aidan (Alvin) Kimel's post The Curious Trinity of Dale Tuggy posted on 29 July 2017).

After several comments there, I found myself banned (probably because I "disturbed the driver" - the same happened to me at Kimel's Blog Eclectic Orthodoxy, BTW). As I believe my comment had some merit, I re-propose it here.

@ John Thiomas [August 10, 2017]

They [Orthodox priests or bishops] accept it [Trinity] because church accepted it and believe that church was led by Holy Spirit in doing so.

[Banned comment, 24 August 2017] To use the expression "[the] church accepted it" implies that someone had to propose it to the Church, first. There is no doubt that in its fully fledged form, it was the Cappadocian scoundrels that proposed it. Either we expose the Trinity starting from this end result (this seems to be the favourite approach, here [at Dale Tuggy's Blog]), OR (which I believe makes more sense) we start from the beginning, from the "original sin" that brought the Church to that end result, that is from the "another God and Lord" (Gr. theos kai kurios eteros) first introduced by Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 56 [@ ccel.org]), which screwed up Biblical Strict Monotheism.

Whoever is interested in exposing the fully fledged "trinity", starting from the "original sin", is welcome to comment on this post/comment.