The Christian Discussion Thread X: Originally there were 15

[Lower Nubia]

If man-made laws are not natural, and religion is man-made, with the law being a carbon copy of 'divine' law, then within that law the concept of "good" and "evil" can be found, then your statement: "Nothing about us is unrepentant or evil. There is nothing to repent to the universe for, for our existence is no one’s fault, especially not our own." Becomes false, because under the law there is evil to repent of, and goodness to uphold.

You have not proved that man made laws are all natural by necessity. That is the mistake in your argument. Now will you answer the question?

My intention was never to prove that man-made laws are natural. My point was to put you in a dilemma: if man-made laws are not natural, then you question naturalism. If they are, then Christian Moral law can enter into human law, thus natural law, and thus Good and Evil exist as under that law.

That’s what you wanted:

Me: “Unless there's law by which evil is measured and accounted for.”

You: “Demonstrate to me such a natural law.”

Seeing as I have demonstrated that using your definitions, I have proved my position.

[Nea Byzantia]

The satanic idols of Pachamama have been removed from the Church by faithful lay Catholics and thrown into the Tiber! Just as St. Boniface cut down the pagans' tree and as lay Catholics barred heretics from preaching during the early Church, two brave men walked into a church and removed the idols that were disrespectfully placed at the feet of Our Lady. They proceeded to walk out of the church and throw them into the River Tiber.

All glory to God! Ave Maria et Ave Christus Rex!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoB_gjuZgf8 - Video of the idols being removed and thrown into the Tiber!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_loUTdDJT6Y - Dr. Taylor Marshall's video on this great act.

I'm critical of acts like those from two points of view.
1. as much as those statues reek of pagan idols, tossing them away is unrespectful of the persons who did put those there, regardless of their reasons, it sends the message that they aren't welcome

But they aren't...

[Kernen]

As I remember, Zac sought redemption, whereas I reject the notion as humiliating. Also, collecting taxes isn't really the same as consumer loan collection.

Like I said, you guys do you. Its your time to waste.

Zac sought redemption upon seeing Christ, I presume he was not repentant until that period, mirroring your situation. Zac collected more taxes than required, which was why he was rich. No doubt people starved because of his actions.

Stop trying to push yourself out of Jesus' love circle.

Oh, see, I didn't know that. You're right. See, this is why I post here. I've no interest in participating, but I think the details of your religion are neat.

I'm not trying to convert him, or make him believe. This notion of their "Unrepentant evil" is simply an obvious facade.

I believe that you aren't trying to convert me, which is most of the reason that I have been civil in my disagreement. I disagree about the unrepentant evil bit. By any measure of your moral law, I am not a moral person. I'm positive we can dither about whether that makes me evil or just immoral. We can go with either. I'm comfortable with it, because operating on my own code gets me more of what I want. By some measures of judgment I have encountered, that alone condemns me.

The unrepentant part is where I take issue, since I am unrepentant. I find the notion of worship degrading and an omnipotent and omniscient god offensive for the reasons Jean-Paul Sarte already gave. Its vanishingly unlikely that I'll change my mind for reasons I've already given in the thread.

So I don't honestly believe that I, as an individual, am beyond redemption in the eyes of your god under Catholic beliefs, though by certain measures it can seem that way. I do believe, sincerely, that I am sufficiently unwilling to be redeemed on enough levels as to make it unlikely either way.

[Lower Nubia]

Zac sought redemption upon seeing Christ, I presume he was not repentant until that period, mirroring your situation. Zac collected more taxes than required, which was why he was rich. No doubt people starved because of his actions.

Stop trying to push yourself out of Jesus' love circle.

Oh, see, I didn't know that. You're right. See, this is why I post here. I've no interest in participating, but I think the details of your religion are neat.

The tree which he climbed is currently a stump for pilgrimage.

I'm not trying to convert him, or make him believe. This notion of their "Unrepentant evil" is simply an obvious facade.

I believe that you aren't trying to convert me, which is most of the reason that I have been civil in my disagreement. I disagree about the unrepentant evil bit. By any measure of your moral law, I am not a moral person. I'm positive we can dither about whether that makes me evil or just immoral. We can go with either. I'm comfortable with it, because operating on my own code gets me more of what I want. By some measures of judgment I have encountered, that alone condemns me.

For sure, under Islamic law I am an unrepentant Hell bound sinner. In Atheism my morality is irrelevant. In Unitarian Universalism my morality is ‘cool dude’. For a moral system to be a reasonable effect in your life, you have to subscribe (consciously or unconsciously) to that system, which is why I pay no mind to Islamic morality, as you pay no attention to Christian morality.

The unrepentant part is where I take issue, since I am unrepentant. I find the notion of worship degrading and an omnipotent and omniscient god offensive for the reasons Jean-Paul Sarte already gave. Its vanishingly unlikely that I'll change my mind for reasons I've already given in the thread.

So I don't honestly believe that I, as an individual, am beyond redemption in the eyes of your god under Catholic beliefs, though by certain measures it can seem that way. I do believe, sincerely, that I am sufficiently unwilling to be redeemed on enough levels as to make it unlikely either way.

Fair enough.

[Luminesa]

The Greco-Roman gods are demons. And these idols were enshrined in a Catholic Church in Rome because shenanigans.

Man, I tried praying to Zeus once and it didn’t work. You’re out of luck there, too.

Zeus is too busy trying to get another nymph pregnant. It’s like calling the pharmacy, they gonna put you on hold until Zeus is done making another demigod.

[Luminesa]

Oh, see, I didn't know that. You're right. See, this is why I post here. I've no interest in participating, but I think the details of your religion are neat.

The tree which he climbed is currently a stump for pilgrimage.

I believe that you aren't trying to convert me, which is most of the reason that I have been civil in my disagreement. I disagree about the unrepentant evil bit. By any measure of your moral law, I am not a moral person. I'm positive we can dither about whether that makes me evil or just immoral. We can go with either. I'm comfortable with it, because operating on my own code gets me more of what I want. By some measures of judgment I have encountered, that alone condemns me.

For sure, under Islamic law I am an unrepentant Hell bound sinner. In Atheism my morality is irrelevant. In Unitarian Universalism my morality is ‘cool dude’. For a moral system to be a reasonable effect in your life, you have to subscribe (consciously or unconsciously) to that system, which is why I pay no mind to Islamic morality, as you pay no attention to Christian morality.

The unrepentant part is where I take issue, since I am unrepentant. I find the notion of worship degrading and an omnipotent and omniscient god offensive for the reasons Jean-Paul Sarte already gave. Its vanishingly unlikely that I'll change my mind for reasons I've already given in the thread.

So I don't honestly believe that I, as an individual, am beyond redemption in the eyes of your god under Catholic beliefs, though by certain measures it can seem that way. I do believe, sincerely, that I am sufficiently unwilling to be redeemed on enough levels as to make it unlikely either way.

Fair enough.

Huh! Learn about new pilgrimage sites every day! O[]o

[Tarsonis]

I’m inclined to agree with that. But the case could be made that it’s satanic in a round about way. Satan as the father of lies who deceived mankind at the beginning, would ultimately be responsible for people going astray and “forgetting God”

It's also hard to forget God when the concept was never introduced to you in the first place, but that comes with its own set of theological issues.

We believe at the very beginning all humanity new God, even if only the most basic capacity. Over time humans went their separate ways and many groups forgot forging their own fake religions, but still keeping to that most basic universal concept of love thy neighbor.

[Lost Memories]

I'm critical of acts like those from two points of view.
1. as much as those statues reek of pagan idols, tossing them away is unrespectful of the persons who did put those there, regardless of their reasons, it sends the message that they aren't welcome
2. making a spectacle of the act is eerily similar to the recording of the massacre of the two mosques in australia, it's an incitation to violence

Side notes on it:
-It was curious how most of the comments from the video are from worldwide, would have guessed it would get more local attention first, but then also noticed reddit is promoting the video..
-from reading a bit about how those statues got there, it seems there was an attempt to merge the "mother earth" amazonian cult into the marian cult, which isn't something new, and would be a sensible way to bridge the amazonia traditions with christianity
-on the upside, the perpetrator does have some smooth camera movement

1. Pagan idols have no place in any church. Pagans can repent and convert, but we will not bend the knee to them.
2. Inciting lay Catholics to reject heresy? Very good.
-It was forwarded to a few well known TradCath personalities like Taylor Marshall immediately after being punished
-We will not merge our devotion to the Holy Mother with a false pagan religion. Ever.

Do you think pagans are going to convert as an act of admiration for your superior culture, while you only show them disdain? I don't think that's how it works. These kind of actions don't help dialogue.
While i do agree too much liberty was allowed, as much as to have a pagan rite(or not a clearly christian one) in a church. But again, having an hissy fit about it, going to throw stuff in a river, and making a show about it, isn't a showing of civility.
Nor a showing of justice, if what they did was just, why act like thieves, why not being open about it?

You only see "Inciting lay Catholics to reject heresy", i also see "reeling people up to do other inane acts like these", inane because they don't really solve anything, they're just an outburst, while they still carry a worrying element of starting to target the objects to eventually get to the people. And also promote personal justice, shouldn't we be enouth civilized to have left that behind?

If some pieces of wood are enough to make some feel threatened in their faith, then there was something shaky in them to start with.
A piece of wood or a consecrated altar and church, who's going to win? Shouldn't the latter be the obvious answer for a christian?
It could have been a rite of purification for all we know. (which isn't much, as communication from the clergy has been lacking, which is the root problem of some feeling the need to take individual action)

-It was forwarded to a few well known TradCath personalities like Taylor Marshall immediately after being published

Yeah, how come i'm finding it curious for an american youtube opinionist to be the first reference for a vandalic act done in a church in rome?
Something doesn't add up geographically. Wouldn't be surprised if the culprit will be found to be an american too. A new kind of tourism?

-We will not merge our devotion to the Holy Mother with a false pagan religion. Ever.

You're welcome to read this article:
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/henrykarl ... tradition/
There is an history of catholicism trying to save the salvageable from pagan cults it converted.

This is one instance where I can say I only half agree with the trads. If this was incorporating a traditional figure to represent life, and sanctifying it to be used as a representation of the Blessed Theotokos, as the New Eve, such a thing would have a long and storied history in the Church, such a thing would be perfectly licit.

Wanting to be optimistic and assuming that was the intention on the higher hierarchies, it's also evident the execution has been sloppy.

The only way this could be better if he had burned the idols first so they couldn’t be recovered and replaced.

In the inanity of it, there was something poetic about getting those statues to float away by the current, something like "now they're back into nature"
(while i doubt there was any symbolic meaning for the choice of tossing them into a river..)

[The New California Republic]

It's hard to worship Satan when you don't believe that Satan exists.

I’m inclined to agree with that. But the case could be made that it’s satanic in a round about way. Satan as the father of lies who deceived mankind at the beginning, would ultimately be responsible for people going astray and “forgetting God”

I mean, to take that literally, unless we suffer a brain injury or illness then we will always be aware that the concept of God is there, we won't "forget" it at all. In the absence of said things occurring it's kinda hard to forget about God as a concept due to the daily reminders of it, even in an increasingly secular world.

[Salus Maior]

Pachamama isn’t even satanic, considering that she’s the Inca goddess of life

Eh, paganism and satanism are two sides of the same coin more or less.

[Salus Maior]

Also, happy feat day to my name saint, Blessed Karl.

[Lost Memories]

I’m inclined to agree with that. But the case could be made that it’s satanic in a round about way. Satan as the father of lies who deceived mankind at the beginning, would ultimately be responsible for people going astray and “forgetting God”

I mean, to take that literally, unless we suffer a brain injury or illness then we will always be aware that the concept of God is there, we won't "forget" it at all. In the absence of said things occurring it's kinda hard to forget about God as a concept due to the daily reminders of it, even in an increasingly secular world.

The "forgetting god" is most likely meant on a societal level, not on individual level.

Knowledge and understanding can be developed or lost to time, across generations.

[Luminesa]

Also, happy feat day to my name saint, Blessed Karl.

HAPPY FEAST DAY!

[Salus Maior]

The satanic idols of Pachamama have been removed from the Church by faithful lay Catholics and thrown into the Tiber! Just as St. Boniface cut down the pagans' tree and as lay Catholics barred heretics from preaching during the early Church, two brave men walked into a church and removed the idols that were disrespectfully placed at the feet of Our Lady. They proceeded to walk out of the church and throw them into the River Tiber.

All glory to God! Ave Maria et Ave Christus Rex!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoB_gjuZgf8 - Video of the idols being removed and thrown into the Tiber!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_loUTdDJT6Y - Dr. Taylor Marshall's video on this great act.

I hope that guy's name-saint is St. Boniface.

[Thermodolia]

Pachamama isn’t even satanic, considering that she’s the Inca goddess of life

Eh, paganism and satanism are two sides of the same coin more or less.

I’d argue against that. Satanism is basically an inverse of Christianity, though in reality satanists are closer to atheists than pagans

[Minachia]

Also, happy feat day to my name saint, Blessed Karl.

Out of curiosity, why exactly was the last Austrian emperor beatified?

[Lower Nubia]

Eh, paganism and satanism are two sides of the same coin more or less.

I’d argue against that. Satanism is basically an inverse of Christianity, though in reality satanists are closer to atheists than pagans

Satanism is technically anything that is against Christ, though it can be a specific religious movement.

[Thermodolia]

I’d argue against that. Satanism is basically an inverse of Christianity, though in reality satanists are closer to atheists than pagans

Satanism is technically anything that is against Christ, though it can be a specific religious movement.

So Judaism and Islam are satanic now?

[Luminesa]

Satanism is technically anything that is against Christ, though it can be a specific religious movement.

So Judaism and Islam are satanic now?

Satanism I thought was more of a specific movement. There's an atheistic movement and a theistic movement. Satanism probably would be more defined as a set of beliefs which fly in the face of virtue and attack Jesus, rather than simply accepting Him as either a prophet or a teacher. Those beliefs bring forth a different debate about the nature of Christ. Most Satanists know what Jesus represents, and attack Him for being what He is.

[Tarsonis]

1. Pagan idols have no place in any church. Pagans can repent and convert, but we will not bend the knee to them.
2. Inciting lay Catholics to reject heresy? Very good.
-It was forwarded to a few well known TradCath personalities like Taylor Marshall immediately after being punished
-We will not merge our devotion to the Holy Mother with a false pagan religion. Ever.

Do you think pagans are going to convert as an act of admiration for your superior culture, while you only show them disdain? I don't think that's how it works. These kind of actions don't help dialogue.
While i do agree too much liberty was allowed, as much as to have a pagan rite(or not a clearly christian one) in a church. But again, having an hissy fit about it, going to throw stuff in a river, and making a show about it, isn't a showing of civility.
Nor a showing of justice, if what they did was just, why act like thieves, why not being open about it?

You only see "Inciting lay Catholics to reject heresy", i also see "reeling people up to do other inane acts like these", inane because they don't really solve anything, they're just an outburst, while they still carry a worrying element of starting to target the objects to eventually get to the people. And also promote personal justice, shouldn't we be enouth civilized to have left that behind?

If some pieces of wood are enough to make some feel threatened in their faith, then there was something shaky in them to start with.
A piece of wood or a consecrated altar and church, who's going to win? Shouldn't the latter be the obvious answer for a christian?
It could have been a rite of purification for all we know. (which isn't much, as communication from the clergy has been lacking, which is the root problem of some feeling the need to take individual action)

-It was forwarded to a few well known TradCath personalities like Taylor Marshall immediately after being published

Yeah, how come i'm finding it curious for an american youtube opinionist to be the first reference for a vandalic act done in a church in rome?
Something doesn't add up geographically. Wouldn't be surprised if the culprit will be found to be an american too. A new kind of tourism?

-We will not merge our devotion to the Holy Mother with a false pagan religion. Ever.

You're welcome to read this article:
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/henrykarl ... tradition/
There is an history of catholicism trying to save the salvageable from pagan cults it converted.

This is one instance where I can say I only half agree with the trads. If this was incorporating a traditional figure to represent life, and sanctifying it to be used as a representation of the Blessed Theotokos, as the New Eve, such a thing would have a long and storied history in the Church, such a thing would be perfectly licit.

Wanting to be optimistic and assuming that was the intention on the higher hierarchies, it's also evident the execution has been sloppy.

The only way this could be better if he had burned the idols first so they couldn’t be recovered and replaced.

In the inanity of it, there was something poetic about getting those statues to float away by the current, something like "now they're back into nature"
(while i doubt there was any symbolic meaning for the choice of tossing them into a river..)

I’d prefer “as man returns to the earth as ashes and dust, so do their graven idols”

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

You have not proved that man made laws are all natural by necessity. That is the mistake in your argument. Now will you answer the question?

My intention was never to prove that man-made laws are natural. My point was to put you in a dilemma: if man-made laws are not natural, then you question naturalism. If they are, then Christian Moral law can enter into human law, thus natural law, and thus Good and Evil exist as under that law.

That’s what you wanted:

Me: “Unless there's law by which evil is measured and accounted for.”

You: “Demonstrate to me such a natural law.”

Seeing as I have demonstrated that using your definitions, I have proved my position.

I don't need to not question methodological naturalism in order for you to still have to demonstrate that a moral statement on good and evil exists as a law within reality. You have proven nothing, and have spent your time making digs at my position instead. I can defend my position, but that is entirely not the point of what I am asking you. I am asking you to demonstrate that your statements on good and evil have any bearing on how the universe acts.

[Tarsonis]

My intention was never to prove that man-made laws are natural. My point was to put you in a dilemma: if man-made laws are not natural, then you question naturalism. If they are, then Christian Moral law can enter into human law, thus natural law, and thus Good and Evil exist as under that law.

That’s what you wanted:

Me: “Unless there's law by which evil is measured and accounted for.”

You: “Demonstrate to me such a natural law.”

Seeing as I have demonstrated that using your definitions, I have proved my position.

I don't need to not question methodological naturalism in order for you to still have to demonstrate that a moral statement on good and evil exists as a law within reality. You have proven nothing, and have spent your time making digs at my position instead. I can defend my position, but that is entirely not the point of what I am asking you. I am asking you to demonstrate that your statements on good and evil have any bearing on how the universe acts.

Can you give an example
Of how the universe would abide by a law of morality?

[Hanafuridake]

Pachamama isn’t even satanic, considering that she’s the Inca goddess of life

Eh, paganism and satanism are two sides of the same coin more or less.

Paganism is just a derogatory word for a bunch of unrelated religions which happen to believe in multiple deities. There's not one coin with two sides but a bunch of different wildly different coins.

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

I don't need to not question methodological naturalism in order for you to still have to demonstrate that a moral statement on good and evil exists as a law within reality. You have proven nothing, and have spent your time making digs at my position instead. I can defend my position, but that is entirely not the point of what I am asking you. I am asking you to demonstrate that your statements on good and evil have any bearing on how the universe acts.

Can you give an example
Of how the universe would abide by a law of morality?

Sure. It would certainly be the case that if the universe dealt out some sort of "the good" (let's say justice) to conscious beings, that we could say some law in the universe were good. I challenge anyone to demonstrate to me that the virtuous person gets any more a lot in life than the unvirtuous person. This would not necessarily have to be justice, but it would have to apply in most every case. After all, if something is just a guideline that only applies in certain circumstances, then it can be broken and taken advantage of, and evil is the best at taking advantage of things. If it is randomly applied, it is not a law or good at all.

[Northern Davincia]

Satanism is technically anything that is against Christ, though it can be a specific religious movement.

So Judaism and Islam are satanic now?

In a way, yes. The phrase "Synagogue of Satan" did not originate from nowhere. Judaism nowadays is in error by ignoring the prophets, and Islam is based on the words of a false prophet.