Christian theology thread for Christians - Deus homo factus est naturam erante, mundus renovatus est a Christo regnante

[HodgePodgeRogerDodger]

The largest issue with Catholics are the lowering of standards post-WW2 for priests and how poorly catechised the laity is. Political retards then fill in the gaps, the Child abuse scandal made them rife for lawsuits (rightfully and weaponized), and in the US since Coughlin the more active elements that did anything have been under scrutiny from both Rome and Washington.

If you ever want to see how a Western country hamstrings the Faith, look at Canada. I don’t mean Catholics, I mean broadly. Canadian Glowies are the incompetent siblings of Americans and every conspiracy about them has been proven by their ineptitude.

 

[marlimar]

That the serpent was a literal snake and the curse is why snakes crawl on their bellies

We have to first understand that none of this was written down until Moses was told what to write down by God. This same Moses used a snake on a staff to heal the Israelites that were being bitten in the desert, I think that a snake is as close to what existed contemporaneously that could be communicated and understood by folks. The belly crawling may have to do with prostrating being the only posture that can ever be attained.

That he will be cursed to roam the earth? What does "eating dust" mean

Satan is mentioned to be called to account in God's presence in the book of Job, where he describes as travelling from north to south and east to west, implying that since he was cast out of heaven, he roams the Earth looking for "dust" to eat. This dust, to me, implies the nature that Adam was created from, the breath of life was the only thing that made Adam special, that Adam had a personal relationship with God. "Eating dust" would in this interpretation mean that Satan devours men, and separates them from God by taking the breath of life from them.

Adam was right next to her. Did the serpent also deceive him, and he just blamed Eve? Or did he knowingly let her sin?

Adam was next to her and heard it from God himself to not eat that tree, Adam wasn't deceived by the "surely you will not perish" part, but his sin was indeed complacency as he himself ate of the apple after her, then proceeded to blame that lady you forced upon me, that I never asked for. Much like Adam and Eve hiding in the garden after they realized they were naked, pretending that literal God didn't know where they were.

That Eve's deception by the serpent shows women are more prone to being seduced by sin or confused by the enemy;

This teaches me that men are to be the guardian of not just physical threats, but idea threats to women. This has failed all societies.

1. Was Adam's sin worse than Eve's because he had a personal relationship with God?
2. That Adam's punishment is worse than Eve's. I do believe this to be the case; his punishment includes mortality

Sin is sin, it separates you from God, he can't be in the presence of sin or something like that, which is why Christ had to be fully man as well as fully God. Adam's unique punishment is that he has to toil the fields, Eve's unique punishment is the pains of labor, mortality is a common punishment for both.

 

[Big Miss Steak]

We have to first understand that none of this was written down until Moses was told what to write down by God. This same Moses used a snake on a staff to heal the Israelites that were being bitten in the desert, I think that a snake is as close to what existed contemporaneously that could be communicated and understood by folks.

I'm not really understanding this. The Israelites would have been familiar with other yucky or dangerous creatures, such as lions, scorpions, etc. Does "serpent" in this case just mean "deceiver?"

This teaches me that men are to be the guardian of not just physical threats, but idea threats to women. This has failed all societies.

There are thousands of years of recorded human history where men have propagated degeneracy, heresy, and other such harmful ideas before women held any sort of sway over society. If anything, Adam blaming Eve foreshadowed how men would blame women for their failings for the rest of human history.

Adam's unique punishment is that he has to toil the fields, Eve's unique punishment is the pains of labor, mortality is a common punishment for both.

Women toil in fields plenty. "...until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return" is specifically talking about mortality and is only addressed to Adam. Eve's curse is that childbirth will be painful and that her husband will rule over her (another thing to unpack, but that's for another day). Sure women die in childbirth sometimes, but death isn't mentioned at all until God is addressing Adam.

Satan is mentioned to be called to account in God's presence in the book of Job, where he describes as travelling from north to south and east to west, implying that since he was cast out of heaven, he roams the Earth looking for "dust" to eat. This dust, to me, implies the nature that Adam was created from, the breath of life was the only thing that made Adam special, that Adam had a personal relationship with God. "Eating dust" would in this interpretation mean that Satan devours men, and separates them from God by taking the breath of life from them.

Very insightful.

 

[marlimar]

Does "serpent" in this case just mean "deceiver

Open for discussion, I doubt the "snakes" they were dying from bite of in the desert were metaphorical, nor was the snake Moses rose on a staff for the Israelites to lay their eyes on to be healed. The serpent in the Garden story is promised to have it's head crushed by the heel of the woman, is that a metaphor or literal? I always look to Christ and the Jewish prophecies he fulfilled: "They look upon that which they have pierced", many think this refers to the spear that produced blood and water from Jesus' side, but they nailed him to the cross, which would involve piercing already. It's an unknowable mystery what exactly the serpent in the Garden was, mysteries are reserved for God, we just have the revelations that he has revealed to us through his words in the book. The fact that the book is translated and interpreted so many different ways may lead us to miss the forest for the trees, distracting us from the life, death and resurrection of Christ Jesus, without whom there is no hope.

If anything, Adam blaming Eve foreshadowed how men would blame women for their failings for the rest of human history.

I agree and it persists today, even my own heart wants women to be subservient to men.

Sure women die in childbirth sometimes, but death isn't mentioned at all until God is addressing Adam.

Satan says to Eve, "surely you will not perish" so she was aware that God told her that she can't eat from that tree, and the consequences would be death. The chronology of events is something that is so curious to me but is ultimately meaningless.

 

[Preacher ✝]

The Wisdom of Bl. Fulton Sheen

Day 195 - Many souls fail to find God because they want a religion which will remake society without remaking themselves.

 

[GenderCop]

This is what I was taught, were other folks here taught some other version of the beginnings of Western Civ?
___

Hilaire Belloc's "The Catholic Church and History" argues that the Catholic Church is the central force in the developement of Western civilization. He posits that the Church not only preserved and transformed Roman civilization but also acted as a crucial civilizing influence on the Germanic tribes, shaping the foundations of modern Europe. Belloc emphasizes the Church's role in fostering unity, order, and culture during and after the decline of the Roman Empire.

 

[Slap47]

None of them are institutions, and none come close to the scale of the Catholic Church.

Shinto has an unbroken chain of Emperors going back millenia, Orthodox Christianity is the exact same age as Catholicism, and most of the rest have leadership positions that have been filled for hundreds or even 1000+ of years.

Some say it was billions, perhaps even trillions of people. For no reason at all.

The French Wars of Religion killed 2-4 million people alone and the Thirty Years War killed half of Germany. The Treaty of Westphalia ending all of this created peace by allowing secular leaders to decide the religions of their states. The church only really tried to reform itself in the face of a crisis that threatened its very existence.

Yes, every single Bishop, Priest, Deacon, I heard even the laity was corrupt, down to the infants. Centuries upon centuries, it was horrible.

The point is that this was not just bad Popes. The institution was utterly corrupt. Hell, that is even a common theme throughout the entirety of the Canterbury Tales from centuries before Luther.

You say that like it's a bad thing. Some ideologies don't deserve to exist. The Catholic Church single-handedly save the West from becoming muslim, and it will do it again.

I was referring to the Hussite Wars and Albigensian Crusade that killed millions of Christians. If Protestantism did not have the protection of secular German princes it probably would have also just been genocided out of existence. Catholicism has historically responded to challenges with brute force and owes its long existence to that.
Islam is a different religion, but the Crusaders killing everybody in Jerusalem (including the Christians) everytime they retook the city is hardly defensible. Saladin was a Muslim and he did not do that.

This one is my favorite lie you've spouted. Good job, you son of the devil.

The church funds a lot of hospitals & charity in North America & Europe. In some European countries the church is a source for social reform that helps poor people. However, most of these efforts are in the west and likely influenced by the larger protestant culture of practical charity around them.

At its core the church does very little. In Latin America their inaction on poverty has contributed to a massive explosion in prosperity gospel grifter churches that will probably overtake Catholicism in LATAM in a few decades. I think Mother Teresa's hospitals highlights this best. They did not treat people. They just gave patients a bed to lay on as they died of their preventable infections. The church viewed this as a holy act worth giving sainthood for. Performative charity for the goal of appearing righteous without putting in the effort to actually make a better world.

 

[mindlessobserver]

The things I was taught that I have discarded or am currently wrestling with, in addition to positions I have recently been exposed to:

The Genesis story is a bit complicated because its actually two stories in one. You have the creation story and then you have the Adam and Eve story. Both are derived from different texts and oral traditions, and understanding them requires less then literal interpretation.

That the serpent was a literal snake and the curse is why snakes crawl on their bellies. There are many other animals that crawl on their bellies and weren't in the curse. "The serpent" instead of "a serpent" also implies that it was a specific entity - Satan. But then what does the curse mean when it says he will "crawl on his belly?" That he will be cursed to roam the earth? What does "eating dust" mean?

The English translation for this part really sucks ass, but the Serpent IS Satan. The actual phrase is "Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made". The text doesn't say that the Serpent IS a wild animal. More that he was more intelligent then them. Up to this point however Adam and Eve had not encountered other entities beyond God himself and the Animals. So there is no context for a fallen Angel like Lucifer.

"Crawl on his Belly" is pejorative. In traditional societies, you bow and scrape before superiors when being humbled as a crime. Saying the Devil will "Crawl on His Belly" is allegorical to this, and is done to illustrate the fallen nature of Satan. As for "Eating Dust", in agriculture societies you either have a productive farm and food, or you don't and you eat dirt. Like Haitians incidentally. This statement means that the Devil and his Works will lead to bad outcomes like famine.

That Eve tricked Adam. This is clearly not the case, because Adam was right next to her. Did the serpent also deceive him, and he just blamed Eve? Or did he knowingly let her sin?

Adam just blamed Eve, which God did not appreciate. Though Eve got the short end of the stick because she sinned first.

That Adam's sin was listening to his wife. This is just sexism. Adam's sin was following Eve's suggestion to sin, not just listening to her.

No, Adam's Sin was eating the fruit and then trying to deflect blame from himself. Eve's sin was tempting him with the fruit. Culpability for different reasons, but to God all sins are equally bad. There is no such thing as context or mitigating factors.

That Eve's deception by the serpent shows women are more prone to being seduced by sin or confused by the enemy; this is used to justify the position that women shouldn't be spiritual teachers/need to be spiritually led by men.

Now this is an entirely different ball of wax and is not necessarily based on scripture. Its more that women CANNOT spiritually lead men. This is more a product of social function and necessity. Women can absolutely be spiritual examples and participate in spirituality. But when it comes to instructing and commanding men as is the role of a Priest, its not possible simply due to how the Genders work in biological function and abstract social organization.

Was Adam's sin worse than Eve's because he had a personal relationship with God?

All sins are equally bad. Any sin leads to eternal damnation due to the absolute nature of Gods justice. It is why we need the intercession of Jesus Christ to take the Punishment on himself so that we can be able to assume the Grace of God's absolute mercy. (John 3:16)

That Adam's punishment is worse than Eve's. I do believe this to be the case; his punishment includes mortality. This is also used to justify the stance that men are wiser than women and hold more responsibility. But couldn't you also say Adam's punishment was worse because he had a personal relationship with God, whereas it doesn't seem like Eve had even spoken to God yet?

I would not say that his punishment was greater or lesser, it was just different.

 

[Trimalchio]

I think Mother Teresa's hospitals highlights this best. They did not treat people. They just gave patients a bed to lay on as they died of their preventable infections.

Honestly, I wonder if this is a case of Mother Teresa "going native" rather than a genuine reflection of Catholic moral teaching, since this kind of attitude is not uncommon among people who believe strongly in karmic retribution. I've seen hospices for animals run by Jains that are similarly apathetic. Their reasoning is that suffering "exhausts" bad karma, and it's better to let this process play out than try to prevent the inevitable. I don't mean that Teresa believed in karma herself, but she may have been influenced by people who did.

 

[Mad_Dog]

0:41

 

[Derrick]

that will probably overtake Catholicism in LATAM in a few decades.

Depending on what country you're referring to this is already the case (assuming you're talking about Catholic v. Protestant)

Protestants already outnumber Catholics in Honduras.

ssstwitter.com_1752090451682.mp4

While it's not my place to weigh in on Catholic Church matters it feels a lot of change has come in the last few years. I hope the church can hold out a few more decades, Christianity in growing in the third world and rapidly declining, if they can hold out a bit more longer there will be very few "liberal Catholics" left to shape Church doctrine with the Robert Sara's of the world left to call the shots.

understanding them requires less then literal interpretation.

:Angry Young Earth Creationist noises intensify:

If you ever want to see how a Western country hamstrings the Faith, look at Canada.

You may be interesting in this video, it's the largest protestant denomination in Canada. One of their "pastors" is an Atheist. One of their Moderators was an open Homosexual, another was a non-Trinitarian.

You see this a lot in Northern Europe with their "Protestant Churches". For example in the largest protestant denomination Netherlands , The Protestant Church of the Netherlands, 1/6 clergy members were Atheist or Agnostic. That shouldn't be too surprising, after all only 27% of self identified Dutch Catholics were Theists, but at least with the Catholic Churches you have a larger authority in the Vatican who can step in and nix any of their nonsense, although if the German Bishops are anything to go by the Vatican's willingness to act seems a bit low.

What can the Church do to fix this problem? Hard to say, in many of these places the local churches have been infiltrated and taken over by the opposing ideology. It probably best to let them continue their membership decline into irrelevancy and then we can have actual Christian groups move in and set up Churches to win over the local Christians. If current trends hold up in 40 years these groups should be nonexistent and all you'll have an even mix of Atheists, Muslims (from the Middle East/North Africa), Catholics (thanks to Polish migration), Orthodox (more eastern European migration), and Protestants from Sub-Saharan African.

 

[Mad_Dog]

John MacArthur has passed away.


Lux aeterna luceat eis, Domine, cum sanctis tuis in aeternum, quia pius es.
Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat eis.

 

[Cassius Crayfish]

Hard to understate his influence on the modern church. Keller, Macarthur and Piper feel like the three titans of faithful American evangelicalism over the last couple of decades (some other prominent figures as well, but their influence has been outsized). Two of those three now rest with their Father.

 

[BIG SHOT Autos]

But when it comes to instructing and commanding men as is the role of a Priest, its not possible simply due to how the Genders work in biological function and abstract social organization.

I'm struggling with this point as well, especially considering that one of things that made me sympathetic towards Christianity was the fact that Joan of Arc has been canonized as a saint. Yeah, I know she wasn't a spiritual leader specifically, but still.

 

[mindlessobserver]

I'm struggling with this point as well, especially considering that one of things that made me sympathetic towards Christianity was the fact that Joan of Arc has been canonized as a saint. Yeah, I know she wasn't a spiritual leader specifically, but still.

It basically boils down to "Men and Women are not the same." Explaining why they aren't the same would probably derail the thread completely. The primary reason for why only Men can be Priests is because that's just the way things are, and have been the way things are for thousands of years. Jesus was a man, the 12 Apostles were men, and the Priests that followed them were all men.

From a purely anecdotal observation though, the Protestant denominations that allowed for the ordination of women recently have veered very strongly into heretical doctrines that overemphasize gods love and compassion and de emphasize gods command for strict adherence to his laws.

 

[Preacher ✝]

The Wisdom of Bl. Fulton Sheen

Day 196 - Help someone in distress and you lighten your own burden; the very joy of alleviating the sorrow of another is the lessening of one's own.

 

[Key the Metal Shitposter]

The primary reason for why only Men can be Priests is because that's just the way things are, and have been the way things are for thousands of years.

Something else to keep in mind, and I know this doesnt apply to protestants, is that there is an old testament concept kept by the Apostles of ritual purity. In Orthodoxy and I presume Catholicism a Priest cannot perform the liturgy if he is actively bleeding because no blood but Christs is allowed in the altar, as it is considered ritually impure. Women cant be priests for multiple reasons but an often overlooked one is that their menstrations make them ritually impure once a month and so a hypothetical woman priest would have to miss liturgy nearly a 4th of the year.

 

[Smashed & Slamed]

I'm struggling with this point as well, especially considering that one of things that made me sympathetic towards Christianity was the fact that Joan of Arc has been canonized as a saint. Yeah, I know she wasn't a spiritual leader specifically, but still.

Joan of Arc was cannonized in the 20th century as a political move. Fighting a war on the side of a catholic king against a catholic king is not saintly behavior.

 

[Preacher ✝]

The Wisdom of Bl. Fulton Sheen

Day 197 - Most commit the same mistake with God that they do with their friends: they do all the talking.

 

[the big new poster]

Does Christianity teach ethnocentrism i.e. looking after and caring for your people before other ethnic groups?
It seems pretty clear to me it does like in Matthew 15:21-28 because we see Jesus say that the reason he looks after the Jews before looking after foreigners is the same reason a father should feed his children first before giving the left-overs to non-family members like the dog. So following Jesus' example we should also feed our children first before giving the leftovers to non-family members and look after our ethnic group first before giving charity to foreigners.
Old Christian scholars like Aquinas and Church Fathers also supported this , even reformers like John Calvin , but it seems like almost every major modern Christian group claims the opposite.
When did this happen? Is it a post-WW2 thing or did modernity cause this change earlier?