Estás usando un navegador desactualizado. Es posible que no muestre este u otros sitios web correctamente. Deberías actualizar o usar un navegador alternativo.
Christian theology thread for Christians - Deus homo factus est naturam erante, mundus renovatus est a Christo regnante
Please Lord, I pray for my family, my friends and even for my cat. I pray for their happiness, their health and their success, even for my cat. I pray for my neighbors and my fellowship. Fill me with your radiance, forgive me for my sins, amen. Every single day. Ver archivo adjunto 9255844
May the Lord bless your faith, even toward the animals we might overlook. It gladdens my heart that men such as you exist, when many are colder than we'd like to admit.
AGDugin talked -and agrees- on the elucidations by Jay Dyer on Nominalism.
Jay Dyer on Tucker Carlson: How Medieval Philosophy Nominalism created modern transgender ideology: “Nominalism is the idea that there are only names to things, not essences. So there’s no human nature. No dog nature. The ancient world believed things have real essences.
Words described metaphysical reality. Occam started denying that. It influenced Luther. Then Hume, Kant, the Enlightenment… If things don’t have essences, then they don’t have genders objectively — everything is just a name.
So I can just name myself he, him, Zer, Z. That’s the logical train from medieval philosophy to postmodern gender ideology. It flies in the face of lived experience. You basically have to be indoctrinated to believe it.”
Where did Dyer get this idea from? Well:
"My 'Nominalism came from Protestantism' is from *Lutheran* scholar Heiko Oberman. Protestants and shitlibs whining about it have never read the book - which demonstrates Luther's influence from Ockham and Gabriel Biel."
And attached was this image:
Dugin's agreement:
"Exactly. Whole modernity (Protestantism included) proceeds from the nominalism. The modern science also. The nominalism (Duns Scott and his hicceitas as preparation for Ockham) is absolutely wrong. The tradition is incompatible with all that mental garbage."
But @utonomosthought has a couple replies:
"if there is value and deep meaning in christianity, the protestant clearly embodied it most. the protestant mindstate was most christlike. most in line with truth. not dogma. high IQ populations. jesus wasn't into organized religion
"you guys hate it and you can't accept it because you love your organized religion, you hate and can't comprehend the idea that protestants embodied the meaning in christianity even if there are problems with text or theory or whatever. the common people grasped the essence more"
I included @utonomousthought's replies because I think it's a good argument for those ideas though I'm leaning into the idea of things having essences, which I think is why there is something instead of nothing. Heidegger talks about this IIRC. Nevertheless I think these ideas can be refined further.
As for Alexander Dugin's harangues, I quote Yang Wenli
"Forgive me, but I think what you’re saying is like repudiating fire because it might cause something to burn down."
Classic Dyer spreading overblown horseshit swamped in ideology and semantic ass games, filtered by borderline anti-contextual thinking, just to get some of those sweet internet points to buy another dose of drugs.
Another day in the life of a sperg atheist pretending to be Online's Top Christian.
I don't understand most of that. I go to church, I try to live a wholesome life, I don't wish to spar with others. All things new, things will get better here or there. The people who argue about faith, I'm not sure of their angle. I'm not sure they really care about anything but upvotes or money. If you believe and worship, what else is there?
Tucker Carlson is okay though. I don't even know if I agree with him, but I am happy he is turning people to religion.
I don't understand why people cross swords on their beliefs.
Exactly. Whole modernity (Protestantism included) proceeds from the nominalism. The modern science also. The nominalism (Duns Scott and his hicceitas as preparation for Ockham) is absolutely wrong. The tradition is incompatible with all that mental garbage.
The irony is Dyer actually depends so heavily on the exact ideas of modernity that Dugin repudiates in order to sell his apologetic brand. No matter the argument—even when debating Vatican II, for goodness sake—he always returns to the highly Kantian “How can the knowing subject justify the possibility of knowledge?”…which was alien to the Neoplatonic traditions of the East and the high scholastic traditions of the West. Before modernity, reality was understood as intrinsically intelligible and the intellect as something ordered toward being. “Grr I hate modernity, but let me lap up modern epistemology and make that the center of my pseudo-philosophical grift.”
Can we all finally admit that TradCaths and Orthobros are the first vibes-based empty theology? Whether it be Dyer or the Twitter users spamming empty cathedrals with “RETVRN” cringeposts, these people have no understanding of religion or even Christianity except for looks.
Can we all finally admit that TradCaths and Orthobros are the first vibes-based empty theology? Whether it be Dyer or the Twitter users spamming empty cathedrals with “RETVRN” cringeposts, these people have no understanding of religion or even Christianity except for looks.
Mainstream Non-denom and Protestant churches are too pozzed and the Catholics are too international for a chud. Orthodoxy satisfies the desire to be with majority "White or White Ethnic" groups while being too niche irl to escape most interest from hostile groups looking to subvert. Protestantism has the problem of being too individualistic where people would rather start a new church entirely when they've lost ground within from pozz and the Catholics have their liberation theology problems and self-effacing tolerance that their anti-gay marriage and anti-abortion views only stem the worst of those impulses. Orthodoxy probably escapes attempts to inject such sentiment at this point but I doubt this will last as attention on them is only growing from the antics of orthobros online getting into constant arguments to prove their based and trad bonafides.
Maybe the truth. What is worship even? I think worship requires a sacrifice. What is belief? I think belief requires more than notional assent. To disregard such things is to treat religion the same way you treat consumer identities, like a choice between equally valid options without any exclusivity: no right ways, just right for the particular person. Choose a spiritual identity as one chooses a diet, aesthetic, or wellness practice?
Can we all finally admit that TradCaths and Orthobros are the first vibes-based empty theology? Whether it be Dyer or the Twitter users spamming empty cathedrals with “RETVRN” cringeposts…
Nah most American converts to EO are former-evangelical Protestants who know apostolic succession matters but nevertheless hate the Catholic Church. There’s also an element of anti-Westernism, a lot of these goobers become Byzantine larpers or Slavophiles. @Squanto Airi is a cool guy and doesn’t afraid of anything so this doesn’t apply to him.
Can we all finally admit that TradCaths and Orthobros are the first vibes-based empty theology? Whether it be Dyer or the Twitter users spamming empty cathedrals with “RETVRN” cringeposts, these people have no understanding of religion or even Christianity except for looks.
I might have certain theological disagreements with Catholics/Orthodox (Prots too tbh), but I have an immeasurable amount of respect for their traditions, history, architecture, etc. With that being said, the tradcaths/OrthoLARPers make it look so fucking cringe and lame. Repeating the same memes, vapid talking points they got from /pol/ who got them from a book someone maybe half read. Like how many of them have actually read anything from the great writers and theologians from the western and eastern churches? Gregory of Nyssa, Tertullian, fucking Augustine even? How many of them have even cracked open a Bible before? Let alone different translations to compare them against each other? I think that's what irks me the most is they like the aesthetics of being a believer, they like to present themselves as pious, but they really don't want to actually engage in the Christian life on a meaningful level. It's applying political brainrot/teamsports mindset to faith which is really lame.
I might have certain theological disagreements with Catholics/Orthodox (Prots too tbh), but I have an immeasurable amount of respect for their traditions, history, architecture, etc. With that being said, the tradcaths/OrthoLARPers make it look so fucking cringe and lame. Repeating the same memes, vapid talking points they got from /pol/ who got them from a book someone maybe half read. Like how many of them have actually read anything from the great writers and theologians from the western and eastern churches? Gregory of Nyssa, Tertullian, fucking Augustine even? How many of them have even cracked open a Bible before? Let alone different translations to compare them against each other? I think that's what irks me the most is they like the aesthetics of being a believer, they like to present themselves as pious, but they really don't want to actually engage in the Christian life on a meaningful level. It's applying political brainrot/teamsports mindset to faith which is really lame.
At least the Bible being read in full should be the basic requirement. Some MUCH of prior literature for 1000s of years has been endlessly referencing, quoting, iterating and alluding to its metaphors and content. There's a throwaway line in the Silence of the Lambs book where Hannibal Lecter is squatting in a motel and the description of his state is a direct allusion to him being Satan. "He enjoyed going to and fro in his suite and walking up and down in it". It's straight from the Book of Job 1:7 "And the Lord said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it."
If you were just reading Silence of the Lambs as is with no knowledge of the Bible you would miss the significance of the writing and build up of Lecter's character. Every other significant literature constantly does this. You'll seriously miss out of greater understanding of a works themes and intent.
