Quote:
You're arguing now for Jesus' divinity, but we've discussed the LOGOS and how it was Philo's clear belief that the LOGOS was not "God", but instead "a god", a creation - even if it was the 1st creation. There's nothing in Clement's writings that refute Philo's take on the LOGOS, meaning we can see just as much evidence for a created LOGOS whose purpose was so that God (being Spirit only) could interract with the known Universe as we can find for your personal take. Actually, considering Philo and his belief in the LOGOS, there's more evidence against the Trinity than for it.


Are you somehow tying this to Clement of Rome?
Sorry, I'm confused as to how you are relating this to what I've written.