The Christian Discussion Thread X: Originally there were 15

[New Visayan Islands]

Given what today is (videlicet, the Solemnity of Christ the King), allow me to greet the thread with a fitting response:

¡Viva Cristo Rey!

[Hakons]

Ya'll alright there?

I've never felt better.

Would you like to explain what you meant in your original post?

Given what today is (videlicet, the Solemnity of Christ the King), allow me to greet the thread with a fitting response:

¡Viva Cristo Rey!

Viva Cristo Rey!

Recognizing the Kingship of Christ over all nations and governments has probably been the biggest factor in my political development. Realizing secularism isn't neutral, and in many ways harmful, turns a lot of preconceptions upside down. Christ is our King, may His will be done in earth as it is in Heaven.

[CivitasDei]

Saudi arabia is building non stop mosques in europe

What are historically christian nations doing to counter this? How many cathedrals and church s are they building in the middle east?

The City of God has no part in the earthly city; it is allied to it only when God wills it be done. God willed the collapse of Rome; these nations will fall too. In that regard, you make a mistake: "historical Christianity" has no meaning, for Christ is king over every nation and every age.

[Lower Nubia]

Saudi arabia is building non stop mosques in europe

What are historically christian nations doing to counter this? How many cathedrals and church s are they building in the middle east?

There are no historically Christian nations that still act as such. Except maybe Poland.

Poland is bae.

Poland, the only country with the perfect monarch.

[Europa Undivided]

Saudi arabia is building non stop mosques in europe

What are historically christian nations doing to counter this? How many cathedrals and church s are they building in the middle east?

Europe is afflicted with excessive secularism and as such will mostly not care. Except Poland. They never let other people tell them how to run things in Poland, and Poland will always tell Germany this:

“Oh really Germany? Do you want to come here again and tell us how to do again?”

Then we have Russia, which is far more conservative.

[Arachkya]

Saudi arabia is building non stop mosques in europe

What are historically christian nations doing to counter this? How many cathedrals and church s are they building in the middle east?

Europe is afflicted with excessive secularism and as such will mostly not care. Except Poland. They never let other people tell them how to run things in Poland, and Poland will always tell Germany this:

“Oh really Germany? Do you want to come here again and tell us how to do again?”

Then we have Russia, which is far more conservative.

The whole "Gay Propaganda" law says enough.

[Europa Undivided]

There are no historically Christian nations that still act as such. Except maybe Poland.

Poland is bae.

Poland, the only country with the perfect monarch.

Jan Sobieski.

WE REMEMBER
IN SEPTEMBER
WHEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED

[Arachkya]

Poland, the only country with the perfect monarch.

Jan Sobieski.

WE REMEMBER
IN SEPTEMBER
WHEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED

Good movie.

[Lower Nubia]

Poland, the only country with the perfect monarch.

Jan Sobieski.

WE REMEMBER
IN SEPTEMBER
WHEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED

I was thinking more.. Jesus Christ.

[Arachkya]

Jan Sobieski.

WE REMEMBER
IN SEPTEMBER
WHEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED

I was thinking more.. Jesus Christ.

Ah right, though I would have gone for Christ Emperor instead.

[The Archregimancy]

Saudi arabia is building non stop mosques in europe

What are historically christian nations doing to counter this? How many cathedrals and church s are they building in the middle east?

The answer:

Quite a few.

Since you seem to have ignored my post on this very subject over in the Islamic Discussion Thread, I'll post it again here in the vague hope that you might actually learn something, given time.

You don't see many churches being built or christians having lots of success in the middle east.

Yes you do.

Let's take the United Arab Emirates. 88% of the population consists of immigrants, and over 12% of the population are Christian. Compare that to the United Kingdom, where 2.8% of the population are Muslim; or France, where 5.6% of the population are Muslim. So which country out of those three has the highest proportion of immigrants who practice a religion typically associated with immigrants? There are also a significant number of newly constructed churches across the UAE; there are at least 9 Catholic churches, and we used to attend the Russian Orthodox church in Sharjah - the largest church in the UAE, with a capacity of somewhere close to 20,000, and built in 2011.


Meanwhile, here in Egypt - if you'll forgive the personal anecdote - I've just returned home from the large Christmas market at the Anglican cathedral right across the street from my apartment, which also happens to be one of the busiest and most active Anglican cathedrals in the world. Of course, about 10% of the population of Egypt is Christian, the overwhelming majority of them from the native Coptic population. I would note that the latter 10% is again significantly higher than the percentage of Muslims in either the UK or France; and this time primarily based on a native, rather than immigrant, population.


None of which is to suggest that the situation of Christians in the Middle East is always hunky-dory rainbows, buttercups, and unicorns; obviously anti-Christian oppression is real in several Middle Eastern countries. Nor is to deny that Christianity is in demographic decline in Europe. But the core argument that "Many mosques being built and many muslim children are being born, both in the islamic and christian world, but you don't see many churches being built or christians having lots of success in the middle east [sic]" is fundamentally flawed, and is the sort of thing that only people who've never been to the Middle East, experienced Christianity in the Middle East, and - frankly - seem to be wholly ignorant of the Middle East would come up with. The real picture is far more complex.

[Hakons]

The greater struggle for Christianity in the West isn't the construction of mosques, but the emptying of existing churches. Secularization is what is causing the religious transformation of Western nations, not Islamic immigration. It's not a problem of letting in too many people of a different religion, it's the rejection of the Christian religion by westerners themselves and the adoption of a quasi-religious secular liberalism.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

The greater struggle for Christianity in the West isn't the construction of mosques, but the emptying of existing churches. Secularization is what is causing the religious transformation of Western nations, not Islamic immigration. It's not a problem of letting in too many people of a different religion, it's the rejection of the Christian religion by westerners themselves and the adoption of a quasi-religious secular liberalism.

It's good to reject dogma.

[Europa Undivided]

The greater struggle for Christianity in the West isn't the construction of mosques, but the emptying of existing churches. Secularization is what is causing the religious transformation of Western nations, not Islamic immigration. It's not a problem of letting in too many people of a different religion, it's the rejection of the Christian religion by westerners themselves and the adoption of a quasi-religious secular liberalism.

To be honest, it’s just that the goats are being more honest with themselves.

[Lower Nubia]

The greater struggle for Christianity in the West isn't the construction of mosques, but the emptying of existing churches. Secularization is what is causing the religious transformation of Western nations, not Islamic immigration. It's not a problem of letting in too many people of a different religion, it's the rejection of the Christian religion by westerners themselves and the adoption of a quasi-religious secular liberalism.

It's good to reject dogma.

Not if that dogma is the truth.

[Arachkya]

It's good to reject dogma.

Not if that dogma is the truth.

Only tradition vcan be changed, Dogma can not.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

It's good to reject dogma.

Not if that dogma is the truth.

And there is no evidence that is the "truth." It is merely one religion amongst many others, and all of them declare their dogma to be the truth.

[Arachkya]

Not if that dogma is the truth.

And there is no evidence that is the "truth." It is merely one religion amongst many others, and all of them declare their dogma to be the truth.

If there was evidence it would not be faith or belief now would it?

[Isles of Metanoia]

Not if that dogma is the truth.

And there is no evidence that is the "truth." It is merely one religion amongst many others, and all of them declare their dogma to be the truth.

Very Masonic thinking there that it's only one among several religious, all equal.

It would have had clout in my nation too since it were established on Masonic ideals based in the French and American Revolutions yet Masons themselves from America betrayed their fellow Filipino Masons in the Philippine-Amrican War.

You know what kind slippery slope your relativism has caused?

Anyway what is sure though is that the Catholic Priests "Gomburza" willingly died for Filipinos in the aftermath of the Cavite Mutiny whereas the First Philippine Republic's brother Masons in the USA and France betrayed the Republic in the Philippine American War.

[United Muscovite Nations]

I've never felt better.

Would you like to explain what you meant in your original post?

Given what today is (videlicet, the Solemnity of Christ the King), allow me to greet the thread with a fitting response:

¡Viva Cristo Rey!

Viva Cristo Rey!

Recognizing the Kingship of Christ over all nations and governments has probably been the biggest factor in my political development. Realizing secularism isn't neutral, and in many ways harmful, turns a lot of preconceptions upside down. Christ is our King, may His will be done in earth as it is in Heaven.

Tbh very poor choice of words. Christ's dominion is over creation. Christ rejects power over nations and governments because Earthly power is ungodly. It's what's valued by flawed humans, not by God. We have to be careful about attributing kingship over all the nations of the world because the wording is very similar to what it was that Satan told Christ to do, but that Christ rejected.

[The Grims]

There are no historically Christian nations that still act as such. Except maybe Poland.

Poland is bae.

Poland, the only country with the perfect monarch.

Is his queen nog also his mother though?

[Hakons]

Would you like to explain what you meant in your original post?



Viva Cristo Rey!

Recognizing the Kingship of Christ over all nations and governments has probably been the biggest factor in my political development. Realizing secularism isn't neutral, and in many ways harmful, turns a lot of preconceptions upside down. Christ is our King, may His will be done in earth as it is in Heaven.

Tbh very poor choice of words. Christ's dominion is over creation. Christ rejects power over nations and governments because Earthly power is ungodly. It's what's valued by flawed humans, not by God. We have to be careful about attributing kingship over all the nations of the world because the wording is very similar to what it was that Satan told Christ to do, but that Christ rejected.

I don't quite get what you're objecting to. I never claimed Christ rules from each individual dominion or government. I'm saying, as is consistent with Christian truth, that Christ is King over all these earthly powers, meaning He is above them, and thus we should seek for His will to be enacted in our earthly societies.

One of our readings from today's mass that is probably relevant:
"For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross." Colossians 1 16:20

[United Muscovite Nations]

Tbh very poor choice of words. Christ's dominion is over creation. Christ rejects power over nations and governments because Earthly power is ungodly. It's what's valued by flawed humans, not by God. We have to be careful about attributing kingship over all the nations of the world because the wording is very similar to what it was that Satan told Christ to do, but that Christ rejected.

I don't quite get what you're objecting to. I never claimed Christ rules from each individual dominion or government. I'm saying, as is consistent with Christian truth, that Christ is King over all these earthly powers, meaning He is above them, and thus we should seek for His will to be enacted in our earthly societies.

One of our readings from today's mass that is probably relevant:
"For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross." Colossians 1 16:20

My objection is that the Earthly powers are not of Him, they are of this world, and therefore they will not be so in the world to come. I do not believe that Christ would wish to be above the nations. He refused to do it once already.

[Hakons]

The greater struggle for Christianity in the West isn't the construction of mosques, but the emptying of existing churches. Secularization is what is causing the religious transformation of Western nations, not Islamic immigration. It's not a problem of letting in too many people of a different religion, it's the rejection of the Christian religion by westerners themselves and the adoption of a quasi-religious secular liberalism.

It's good to reject dogma.

That's a dogma. "It's good to reject dogma" is an absolute claim, saying that we should disregard held dogmas. Thus it is itself a dogmatic claim about truth, and therefore self-defeating to its own intended message.

Not if that dogma is the truth.

And there is no evidence that is the "truth." It is merely one religion amongst many others, and all of them declare their dogma to be the truth.

This is also a dogma. The claim is that there is no evidence for any religion and that all religions make similar claims, thus they are not meaningfully different. For some reason, it is expected that your dogmatic claim is actually the true one, despite rejecting our dogmas on the basis that other competing dogmas exist. Not only is relativism itself a claim, it's not even an internally consistent one.

[Hakons]

I don't quite get what you're objecting to. I never claimed Christ rules from each individual dominion or government. I'm saying, as is consistent with Christian truth, that Christ is King over all these earthly powers, meaning He is above them, and thus we should seek for His will to be enacted in our earthly societies.

One of our readings from today's mass that is probably relevant:
"For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross." Colossians 1 16:20

My objection is that the Earthly powers are not of Him, they are of this world, and therefore they will not be so in the world to come. I do not believe that Christ would wish to be above the nations. He refused to do it once already.

The Earthly powers are not of Him, they're of course the political creation of men. That is not to say, however, that God doesn't have authority above them. Authorities exist only because God permits them, in His Providence, to exist. As St. Paul writes in Romans, "The authorities that exist have been established by God." What Satan offered, which seems to be the basis of your objection, was for Christ to rule directly over the nations as their physical head of state, or king. When we say that Christ is King, we are instead saying Christ is above our presidents, dictators, kings ect... He is the King of kings and Lord of lords.