A discussion touching upon the nature of Protestantism, Catholicism, and Trinitarianism.
IXAB : You are too bright to be a QAnon believer, Macrobius. You no doubt promote it because you think it is good for morale. Mr. Vox Day (another fellow too bright for QAnon but pushes it nonetheless) hinted that he only promotes qanon because he thinks it good for morale, but isn't quite convinced of it himself. The plain truth of the matter is that trump is a traitor, qanon is most likely Israeli intelligence, and when it comes to predicting future polittical events, there's no reason to take qanon seriously, since my batting average is far higher than qanon's (near perfect, and I make just as many predictions), and I am not "in" on anything that's going on, as qanon pretends to be. And I do not say this out of vanity; even Toad has a better batting average than QAnon.
PETR : Ixabert wrote, "Vox Day... hinted that he only promotes QAnon because he thinks it good for morale, but isn't quite convinced of it himself." This is a deeply morally compromising attitude - spreading falsehoods just because they might raise spirits. In the reformation era, Protestants were outraged at invented monkish legends and miracles that had been spread just "to make people more pious." (Or worse, to make people go on lucrative pilgrimages to the monastery housing the bones of an invented saint who had done invented miracles, and stuff like that.) That was without a doubt the origin for many RC/EO miracle-mongering stories that were invented or at least spread uncritically - that they were "good for morale," or might make simple people more pious. Such an undiscriminating attitude tainted by association any real holiness that monks might have possessed.
IXAB : Protestants, as their name might suggest, are at their best when they are attacking, criticising, denouncing, denying, shaming, idol-smashing, destroying. Protestants appear to me an essentially destructive force, and I mean that in a strictly praiseworthy sense. Historically they are doing their best when they are destroying lies (even pious lies), smashing idols (even 'Christian' idols), denouncing corruption, exposing hypocrites, criticising outmoded dogmas, and pushing for the aboolition of outmoded traditions ripe for dismantlement. Protestantism at its best is more deconstructive than constructive.
PETR : Protestants seek to build on the rock of Christ. That is their positive foundation. Even if all the buildings raised on that rock were demolished, again and again, one can still build anew on that sure foundation.
IXAB : The negative & destructive side of the Protestant denomination seems to me the true raison d'être of the Protestant religion; its rightful place & function within Xdom. Its god-given historical rôle. For Protestants have never done very well with regards to construction, i.e. making positive judgments about what dogmas are to be believed, discerning the true from the false, the essential from the incidental.
IXAB : When Protestants try to be constructive, the result an endless ideological spiraling characterised by factionalism & sectarianism. Once that happens talking to them about certain subjects is like talking to a brick wall. I've tried it myself.
PETR : But Unitarians who deny Christ's divinity are not Christians. They are closer to Muslims, even though they might still be thoroughly tangled with the cultural heritage of Trinitarian Christian civilisation.
IXAB : The Trinitarian vs. Unitarian debate is a perfect case in point. They both make undeniably true points that neither side seems capable of addressing (and I am not taking a middling position on the matter, saying that one is 'half' right & the other is 'half'; There are many things that the Trinitarian is 100% right about & the Unitarian entirely mistaken, & there are certain things that ther Unitarian is 100% right about & the trinitarian refuses to address).
IXAB : Xianity seems to me to embrace Trinitarianism & Unitarianism; otherwise we'd have to exclude a good number of universally esteemed men who were active during the first 300 yrs. of Xianity, many of them regarded as the fathers of the Church. The belief that God is One and not Three, by the way, does not necessarily imply a denial of Jesus' divinity; for one can believe in that he partakes of the qualities of divinity, and esteem him a divine being, while disbelieving the notion that Jesus is 100% identical with the Most High. The Muslims, for instance, regard Jesus as divine in the sense that they believe him to be the incarnation of the divine spirit (ruh allah) and the personificaiton of logos, both of which entail a belief in his divinity.
IXAB : I have noticed that the Unitarian will never address certain truths that the Trinitarian regards as central to his argument, while I have yet to come across a single Trinitarian consider many seemingly undeniable truths about the Bible and early Xianity that perfectly consistent with the Unitarian position but incompatible with Nicenaean Trinitarianism. Iesus Christ did seem to subscribe to a 'Unitarian' conception of God. Some of the things that Xt said do seem irreconcilable with the Trinitarian doctrine, at least in the precise form that the Trinitarians have thus far presented it.
IXAB : The Protestant religion exists; therefore it must serve some purpose or function in the overall plan, since there is nothing under the heavens that is unforeseen by god, & does not ultimately serve god's will, in my view, though often in ways that the finite mind will never be able to rasp. Pious lying has proven a strong temptation even in otherwise good people. We needed Protestantism to destroy it. For such lying is destructive to the church.
CLEF : Inventing beliefs to boost morale or "make people more pious" happened long before the "reformation era" and hasn't ended. Believing we have a shorter list of "what must I do to be saved" is a prime example.
IXAB : Believing that the list, short or long, will save us, is another.
CLEF : The year was 1529, the event was the second diet of speyer, and the particular matter that brought about labeling of evangelicals as 'Protestants' was their objecting to undemocratic religious prejudice regarding the reaffirmation of the edict of worms. Names matter and even Lutheran didn't want to have his name associated to "his" refor. Better term would be restoration. "To restore his way." As Paul was a member of a sect known as "the way" which is also what the torah is called.
IXAB : As a necessary de-constructive force, the Protestants are unsurpassed in the history of religion, & their influence in that respect has been mostly for the better. But formulating correct doctrine is the area in which Protestants seem to me the most inept, both from a theological/philosophical point of view, & from a practical view (religion is after all supposed to be essentially practical in nature--the salvation of souls is a practical affair.
CLEF : They still wonder after the beast, is wh. : Most of what the first century Church (of the wilderness as stephen called it) practiced was excluded as Christianity was formed.
PETR : Ask any architect, sometimes you have to pull down before you can build anew.
CLEF : 2 Kings 22:13. [...] Just as this discovery prompted a reform.A restoration. So too continues the movement. To tear away what man built.
PETR : But Clefty would not like to build anything at all, but at best live in some mudhut or under a spread blanket.
CLEF : Even those that claim v2 emptied the seat of peter wish to merely tear away what was added.Not rebuild entirely. Just return to what was built after that first century. Petr said, "But Clefty would not like to build anything at all, but at best live in some mudhut or under a spread blanket." Even the first temple was not his desire but David's. As he does not need a house to live in but worship in truth and spirit.
PETR : 1 Corinth. 3:10. "By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as an expert builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one must be careful how he builds."
CLEF : Of course Pete seeks only to shorten stuff. [Clefty then quotes the whole paragraph]
PETR : That does not really add anything to the point. Namely that God wants us to build.
CLEF : God's spirit. Is holy, yes. Sure it does, Pete. Do you not know that you are his temple?
PETR : Clefty would like Christians to be like winos living under a bridge.
CLEF : Was that how the first century church lived?
CLEF : Right, his spirit. Which? His or the holy spirit lives in us? Why would we live under a bridge? Drunk?
PETR : Clefty would like Christians to have the mentality of street bum. That is, after all, how he has been harassing us all these years.
CLEF : Was the first century church street bums?
PETR : No, they were not. They were not some miserablist rabble, even though they could preach to the most miserable ones.
CLEF : Then why you lying I want that? I'd even prefer all things in common.
PETR : Leftist propaganda! Clefty promotes "social gospel," the idea that real Christians are bums.
CLEF : Pete starts with the false piety of monks in their holy pilgrimages and ends up here. Lo. Your attempts at slander are almost as weak as your understanding of first century ways.
iscamaniac Friday at 12:59 AM