Total posts: 8,050
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I am not budging on The Ultimate Reality, so if you don't see the point in it, I would appreciate it if you understood that just because you don't see the point doesn't mean that the point is invalidated.
If nothing else, respect the fact that this is what is written in merriam-webster's collegiate dictionary, and leave it at that.
The supreme or ultimate reality.
If you are not willing to accept this, I will have to give you a lesson in the English language, and I would prefer not to make this a topic about you presuming to know English better than you really do.
Created:
Posted in:
What other realities? I am only aware of one. What makes you think that multiple realities exist?
That One Reality is what I am refering to. I was born of a woman. This is a reality. I am not talking about this reality, I am talking very specifically about The One Reality.
Also, reading through your post with special attention to the bolded/underlined portion...1) I agree with the first bolded/underlined portion in which you imply that "identifying the subject matter with precision" is a good thing.2) I disagree with the second bolded/underlined poration in which you imply that "identifying the subject matter with precision" is a bad thing.It is hard to tell whether you think identifying the subject matter with precision" is a good or bad thing. I would guess by the way you usually talk that you think it is a bad thing but the first bolded/underlined portion in the quote above says otherwise. Please clarify
Precision is not a bad thing. Reason is not a bad thing. None of these things are bad, and we should exercise them. When it comes to seeing God, the way to do it is not through education or reason(the scholastic method) but through purifying the heart(the hesychast method). That is the point I am trying to make, and this is the difference in approach that Orthodox Christianity has with Roman Papalism and mainline protestantism.
If a premise is faulty then the conclusion is faulty by definition.
That is precisely my point. And surely, people use reason to justify many things that are false. Logical does not mean true, even if logic when used properly aims for that goal. The influences on one's heart and what they are working in relation to has a great deal to do with what they consider rational or logical.
Your post-modernist style of thinking is annoying but not unique.
Could not be further. than the truth, post modern thinking is arbitrary and comes from the nihilism inherent to atheism. When you come to understand what it is I am actually saying, you will find that it couldn't be further from postmodern thinking. Postmodern thinking doesn't truly allow room for an Ultimate Reality.
I am representing the Orthodox Christian position.
Jesus said, "Blessed are the pure in heart, they will see God"
Not
"Blessed are those who believe the right things through mental gymnastics, they will see God."
Orthodox Christianity is very different from what they call Christianity in the west.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
No, I hear "Ultimate REality" and think that's a pointless term until you can demonstrate the functional difference between reality as it is and the Ultimate Reality. Watch:Good sense and reason tells us that there can be no existence without reality. That is where everything exists from start to finish.See? I say the exact same thing, and it make more sense without the modifier.
I just told you that The Ultimate Reality IS reality as it is, what, how many times?
Imagine for a moment I have a stable full of horses. I tell you, "The red horse runs fast!"
You could say, "The horse runs fast.", and it would make sense. But no, I am talking about a specific horse. The red horse.
In much the same way, when Insay "The Ultimate Reality", it is for the sake of pointing out specifically what it is that is meant by reality. It is reality that I was born of a woman. Am I talking about being born of a woman? No, I am not.
So what I would tell you is that just because you don't see the point to it doesn't mean that there is no point to it. There is. You not being able to see the point does not negate the point. If you have doubts, give the benefit of the doubt. Otherwise, we are not going to progress anywhere in this discussion.
But let's not get sidetracked: can you get from "This universe was created by a thinking agent" to "and that agent is the god my religion believes in, to the exclusion of all others" (consideration added for poly's benefit).
The universe was created by The Ultimate Reality, and whatever The Ultimate Reality is, that is what it is. There is no other God, this is The One True God, and this is the God my religion believes in.
What further proof do you need?
Created:
From the book of the prophet Isaiah
"In that day they shall sing this song in the land of Judea; Behold a strong city; and he shall make salvation its wall and bulwark.
Open ye the gates, let the nation enter that keeps righteousness, and keeps truth,
supporting truth, and keeping peace: for on thee, O Lord,
they have trusted with confidence for ever, the great, the eternal God;
who hast humbled and brought down them that dwell on high, thou shalt cast down strong cities, and bring them to the ground.
And the feet of the meek and lowly shall trample them.
The way of the godly is made straight: the way of the godly is also prepared.
For the way of the Lord is judgment: we have hoped in thy name, and on the remembrance of thee,
which our soul longs for: my spirit seeks thee very early in the morning, O God, for thy commandments are a light on the earth: learn righteousness, ye that dwell upon the earth.
For the ungodly one is put down: no one who will not learn righteousness on the earth, shall be able to do the truth: let the ungodly be taken away, that he see not the glory of the Lord.
O Lord, thine arm is exalted, yet they knew it not: but when they know they shall be ashamed: jealousy shall seize upon an untaught nation, and now fire shall devour the adversaries.
O Lord our God, give us peace: for thou hast rendered to us all things.
O Lord our God, take possession of us: O Lord, we know not any other beside thee: we name thy name.
But the dead shall not see life, neither shall physicians by any means raise them up: therefore thou hast brought wrath upon them, and slain them, and hast taken away every male of them. Bring more evils upon them, O Lord;
bring more evils on the glorious ones of the earth.
Lord, in affliction I remembered thee; thy chastening was to us with small affliction.
And as a woman in travail draws nigh to be delivered, and cries out in her pain; so have we been to thy beloved.
We have conceived, O Lord, because of thy fear, and have been in pain, and have brought forth the breath of thy salvation, which we have wrought upon the earth: we shall not fall, but all that dwell upon the land shall fall.
The dead shall rise, and they that are in the tombs shall be raised, and they that are in the earth shall rejoice: for the dew from thee is healing to them: but the land of the ungodly shall perish.
Go, my people, enter into thy closets, shut thy door, hide thyself for a little season, until the anger of the Lord have passed away.
For, behold, the Lord is bringing wrath from his holy place upon the dwellers on the earth: the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall not cover her slain."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I don't think you are wrong about God, I know you are wrong. I know this very clearly. That is why I can't believe that your lack of belief in God comes knowing God is.
The Ultimate Reality is God.
Why is this distinction between reality and ultimate reality important?
We are not talking about a reality or realities. We are talking about THE Reality. The very reality that makes any other reality possible. It is a way of identifying the subject matter with precision, not an attempt at woo or confusion.
And yes, this is what we accept as being God, and Orthodox spirituality cannot make sense without this understanding, because Orthodox Spirituality is about purifying the heart(Nous). You cannot purify your heart towards a false god, because idolatry is by nature a defilement of the heart.
The problem with spirituality in western thinking is that it is more concerned with formulating and getting things down into precise terms, logic, reasoning, etc.. It is a type of attitude that was inherited from Rome. Latins think like engineers.
Orthodoxy understands that you can build a tree of logic off of faulty premises and every conclusion you build off of this will technically be logical. We are more concerned with purifying our intentions and making our vision clear than to intelectualize everything.
The western church, both Roman Catholicism and the thousands of reformation churches have descended into heresy and chaos because they don't really get it. Secularism is really the natural progression of the wests dropping the ball.
So you have to understand, I am an Orthodox Christian. I would say that it is probably not very likely that your exposure to Christianity has been through Orthodoxy. We are very different.
And we are also the original church descended from Jesus and the Apostles, who have been very faithful in keeping what was passed down to us.
So if I sound different than the Christians you are accustomed to, that is why.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Sure, but the destinction is not meaningless.
2+2=4 is a reality, but it is not The Ultimate Reality.
It doesn't account for everything.
The distinction is not meaningless. We are not talking about a reality, but THE Reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
that doesn't in any way demonstrate that an ultimate reality exists. It seems sort of special plead-y. There is literally no way to demonstrate that somehow without god 2 +2 would not still equal 4. It's certainly presuppositional, no?
If there is no ultimate reality, that means that there isn't anything that is ultimately real.
If there isn't anything that is ultimately real, there is no such thing as reality.
If there is no such thing as reality, 2 + 2 = 4 cannot really be true.
And really, none of us would be here to discuss these things to begin with.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
You are alive right now. You being alive is reality. After you die, you being alive will not be a reality. Before you were born, you being alive was not a reality.
The Ultimate Reality always was, always is, and forever will be The Ultimate Reality.
The distinction is not word salad.
Created:
Posted in:
Cool. Then show us the decision tree that leads you from 'amorphous consciousness that designed and created all there is' to 'character from the bible.' That's what I'm asking. I'm starting to think maybe you can't do it.
You never thought I could do it to begin with. And you aren't really going to either. You hear "Ultimate Reality" and you think "amorphous consciousness that designed and created all there is"
Good sense and reason tells us that there can be no existence without Ultimate Reality. That is where everything comes from.
Sounds like we're really in for a great discussion: I will believe this no matter what anyone says!!! Come on, if you're not going to participate, then just don't post.
The Ultimate Reality is God, and I challenge you to find anything else worthier of being callled God. You can't, there is nothing greater. No amount of sophistry or mental gymnastics is going to override what is truly reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
The Ultimate Reality is God, and there is no other.
That is the God we acknowledge.
The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The Holiest Name is not one pronounced with words. Getting confused by names is easy. The godless always want to make God a construct. That is easier to deny than The Truth.
You want to know the name of God? The Ultimate Reality. What that truly is, that is God.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
That isn't what I am saying at all.
The Ultimate Reality is not creation. It is God no matter what anybody says. No one can undermine that.
I challenge you to find any god greater, because you won't. There is none.
Now if you wanted to understand my religion it would take a great deal more time and cooperation. Since you will not afford me this, I can sum it up as sincerity of faith and charity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
It is to distinguish between that which is relatively real or real in a sense with that is real absokutely and without contingency.
The Ultimate Reality.
It is real independent of perception or conception.
Television might be a reality, but it is not The Ultimate Reality.
Ultimate Reality is reality in the truest and most complete sense of what that means
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
If you were to walk into an Orthodox Church and express your desire to become Orthodox, they would make you a catechuman. You would be educated about the faith during this period. They wouldn't just baptize you on the spot. It is important. that you have understanding.
I know someone who has been a catechuman for 3 years.
So what is my point?
I can not exhaustively educate you about my faith. If you really wanted to learn, it would take an active effort on your part, a real desire to understand. If you don't understand something or you are struggling with something, that is one thing.. but adopting an attitude of skepticism is like trying to swim upstream. It is actually counterproductive towards understanding.
Really, and for the whole thing to click, you have to accept several things that are related to the revealing. It is really easy to get hung up on one thing that would be clarified in understanding other things.
I am an Orthodox Christian. Because I cannot exhaustively explain my faith, I break it down to the very simplest fundamentals. I can demystify things to an extent. To another extent, I can't, because mysteries are to be experienced, not solved.
The Ultimate Reality is God.
We worship God in Spirit and in Truth.
The Trinity is something to be lived and experienced, not something to be intellectualized. To simply grasp these things on a mental level is like looking at a shadow of the real thing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
There certainly is good reason to use the dictionary.
It is the easiest way to prove that atheists are simply being arbitrary in their dismissal of God, and that reason or truth has nothing to do with their aversions.
It establishes very solidly that it is impossible for me to convince the atheist of anything, because they are dishonest and foolish.
Of course, nothing is established for the nihilistic atheist, because nothing can be established. Reality for them is whatever they can get away with.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
You don't know what I believe. Lets start there.
Lesson 1
The Ultimate Reality is God.
Do you believe that there is Ultimate Reality?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Reality is reality as it truly is. Adding the word ultimate doesn't actually do anything but make your statement sound superficially deep and meaningful.
I already demonstrated how it is meaningful, but like most who have adopted an attitude of being unteachable, you simply ignore what I say and pretend I didn't say anything.
If it was an arbitrary thing, merriam-webster wouldn't have it in their definition.
The phrase 'beyond reproach' definately means something different than what you think it means, by the way
Well, I would hope that you can be corrected, because rebuking my position before you understand it is foolish.
It basically translates as "your outlook is incorrect". In other words, you disagree with me. That is a pretty useless statement because I already knew you disagreed with me. Why not go into detail about what the nature of those disagreements would be?
Because rebuking a position before it is understood is foolish. You have given me enough information to say that you likely have a superstitious understanding of these concepts that isn't actually in line with what we believe.
I can already tell you are superstitious concerning God, because you refuse to acknowledge The Ultimate Reality as God, even going so far as to lack belief in God's existence.
It is not an arbitrary thing. Not a matter of simply disagreeing in this case. The existence of God is a surety, so if you do not know this with 100% certainty, you can't have anything other than a superstitious understanding of God. The God you say doesn't exist cannot be my God.
And really, this is one of the few things you can be 100% certain about, if nothing else at all, that God surely exists.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
You aren't cheating the system, you are just a loser.
Created:
-->
@disgusted
You don't accept anything, you are a nihilist.
You are full of shit.
And a complete loser.
Probably collect a crazy check.
Created:
-->
@disgusted
Loser
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
That is what Calvinism teaches, not Orthodoxy.
See above post.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Foreknowledge =/= determinism.
It is no great thing for God to know how we are going to act before we do so, because God witnessed it happening and was there before we even experienced it.
Time is a constraint for us, not God.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
You seem to be implying that I said it was a perception of some kind at some point. You should withdraw that accusation or provide a quote by me where I did so.
You are very clearly the one accusing me.
I'll take that as a smart ass "yes", feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
Your attitude in this discussion leaves you beyond reproach. After all, you are treating me as a deceiver and egotist, not as someone who wants to educate.
You are frankly, not showing me much respect. I would hope that you have enough sense to treat people in the real world with more courtesy. I would appreciate it if you engaged me reasonably and honestly.
Created:
-->
@disgusted
You say the bible makes these claims, but I don't believe it does.
I also don't believe you have conviction behind anything you say, you are clearly a nihilist.
I think you are a complete loser, so you calling me stupid carries no weight.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
You have free will.
Don't blame God if you use your free will to choose evil. Your choice to rebel against God does not undermine God's sovereignty.
Created:
-->
@disgusted
I don't know what the "ipss" is.
I know you are wrong and God is right.
The Truth is by definition right.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
You can't prove God wrong because God cannot be wrong.
If you find yourself in hell, rest assured it was you who put yourself there. Maybe you should have listened.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I am really quite serious. No attitude.
The Ultimate Reality is not a perception, a conception, or a postulation. It is not an abstraction, but that which is beyond abstraction.
We are using a concept because that is what we have to work with. However, The Ultimate Reality, what that really means and what that really is... not a concept.
The Ultimate Reality is Reality as it truly is, not as it is perceived to be or thought to be.
For you to call this a concept is to mistake the map for the territory. Reality as it truly is cannot be a concept. It is an existence that precedes conception.
On that note... are females allowed to be priests in the 'nation of priests' that you have spoken of before? Just a simple yes or no would save both of us lots of time, since I am telling you right now that I don't care about any additional preaching that you attach to the answer.
In other words, you are trying to justify your willful ignorance and prejudice. You know, I can't help but think you are projecting when you call me passive aggressive and arrogant.
Created:
-->
@disgusted
You don't believe in answers. You're a nihilist.
Reality is whatever you can get away with.
Created:
Posted in:
You use a completely juvenile rhetorical trick to invent a god into existence: if god's reality and you live in reality, then there's a god. You've not demonstrated anything along those lines in 3K posts. Saying it doesn't make it so.
I am not using a juvenile trick to invent a "god" into existence. I am telling you what God means. As you do not respect merriam-webster as a valid source for the defining of terms, I have little doubt that you would also reject any writings from the church fathers or even the bible.
Clearly, The Ultimate Reality is not an invention. It exists.
You accusing me of using juvenile rhetroical tricks though is in fact a juvenile rhetorical trick.
You and PGA are basically the same argument: you presuppose the existence of something because you think it's necessary, without ever demonstrating this necessity,
My argument is that you are debsting a straw man opponent because you can't accept that God is The Ultimate Reality. That is what God means.
and then take it another step further, and say "And it's therefore obviously Jesus." Even if I granted you both that whatever unseen agent to create a universe is necessary and therefore real, you would not be able to make even an inch worth of advancement toward demonstrating that it's got anything to do with the bible.
You have no hope of understanding what is being said because when I say "This is a football" you say "No, it is a hand egg, and you can't prove it is a football".
You say that I would not be capable of making an inch worth of advancement to proving what I'm saying has anything to do with the bible, but you speak from a certain presumption.
That presumption is that you know better, and have nothing more to learn. You are resting on your current understanding, and assuming yourself to be right.
Well, you clearly don't understand what I believe.
And I am not putting you in a pile with other people who only superficially have the same position. I am an Orthodox Christian. PGA is not an Orthodox Christian. I can not vouch for what he says or believes. What I can represent is what Orthodoxy teaches. I am here to represent that position.
And well, as I said, you clearly don't understand what I believe. As you are dismissing what you don't understand, all I am able to see is that you are haughty.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Your so called agnosticism is a pretense for thinking you know better.
If that wasn't the case, you would actually make an attempt to understanding what I am saying instead of pretending like you already know.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
I am not the only one who believes that God is the Ultimate Reality. Besides it being believed by the church for thousands of years, it is in the dictionary.
It is not shocking that I cannot convince a know it all that they don't know it all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
If God is The Ultimate Reality, which God certainly is, you criticizing God for what God does amounts to little more than pointing at the sky and yelling "I don't like the way things are, I would rather it be this way, I replace reality with my own!"
The problem of evil and all its variations fundamentally stem from a superstitious understanding of what God is.
Created:
-->
@keithprosser
The point of the bible is to reveal God as being The Truth, and instruct on right relationship to The Truth. That is how The Church uses it.
But you are wrong, because there certainly was science in the ye old days of yore.
Science means "knowledge", and the ancients certainly had plenty of knowledge.
Knowledge =/= The Truth
But to think that knowledge is the same thing as The Truth... that might be gnosticism! It is an error.
Created:
Posted in:
I was thinking it must have been obnoxious to people who still believe that Trump is racist, sexist, homophobic, a nazi, etc.
Oh wait, he wants us to have more immigrants than ever before... but legally! He must be trying to bring in the Russians!
Created:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
@disgusted
The bible is not a scientific manual. The only people who believe so are protestant fundamentalists. That has never been what the church used the bible for.
That is not a concession that the bible or even the church teaches geocentrism. The Latin Papalists are not the church.
Does your bible contain any truth?
"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
What Augustine is saying is that there is a certain predetermined end for a certain path.
Not that we don't have freewill.
And that is really what double predestination is, the idea that God's absolute sovereignty negates freewill.
But Augustine certainly believed in freewill, and as I said, he did write a book on the subject. If I remember correctly(because it has been a while since I read it), he is having a dialetic with another in an attempt to reconcile God's foreknowledge and freewill.
So I mean... over a thousand years before Calvin the church already wrote about such things.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
It is not predestination the church has an issue with, but double predestination!
Created:
By the way, I protest the topic title, because Roman Papalism isn't really Catholicism.
Created:
-->
@disgusted
I heard that a mathematician once proposed to a girl by mathematically showing how the world revolved around her.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
The understanding the church has is that even though God doesn't make us choose what we do through our freewill, God does know what we are going to choose before we do it.
Freewill is something we absolutely do have, and so we are responsible for our actions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak on this, because it will probably be edifying to an actual Calvinist.
A more full quote from that first reference is...
"These are the great works of the Lord, sought out according to all His pleasure,(6) and so wisely sought out, that when the intelligent creation, both angelic and human, sinned, doing not His will but their own, He used the very will of the creature which was working in opposition to the Creator's will as an instrument for carrying out His will, the supremely Good thus turning to good account even what is evil, to the condemnation of those whom in His justice He has predestined to punishment, and to the salvation of those whom in His mercy He has predestined to grace. For, as far as relates to their own consciousness, these creatures did what God wished not to be done: but in view of God's omnipotence, they could in no wise effect their purpose. For in the very fact that they acted in opposition to His will, His will concerning them was fulfilled. And hence it is that "the works of the Lord are great, sought out according to all His pleasure," because in a way unspeakably strange and wonderful, even what is done in opposition to His will does not defeat His will. For it would not be done did He not permit it (and of course His permission is not unwilling, but willing); nor would a Good Being permit evil to be done only that in His omnipotence He can turn evil into good."
This is not actually double predestination, because it is actually the choice that someone made through their free will that was predestined to damnation, not the one making the choice.
Besides that, Augustine actually wrote a book specifically on the subject of free will which makes it clear that he does in fact believe it.
A more full quote from the second is
"And these we also mystically call the two cities, or the two communities of men, of which the one is predestined to reign eternally with God, and the other to suffer eternal punishment with the devil."
In the context of the book, the two cities are a choice. One between the eternal truth of God and the other the pleasures of the transient world.
This is not actually double predestination.
Calvinistic double predestination is based on the idea that there is no free will, because God's sovereignty makes it impossible.
That is not what the church has ever taught. Neither is what Augustine ever taught.
That said, even if Augustine did teach this, he is one of many church fathers, and it isn't really altogether strange for some of them to hold views that ultimately were not accepted by. the whole church.
Also, and I think it is worth mentioning... Augustine did not know Greek, he knew Latin. The New Testament was written in Greek, not Latin. In fact, because Augustine was working with a Latin translation, he is at least known by the Church to be in error about one thing in particular, and this has had a big impact on the west. He believed that every human shares the guilt of the garden of eden. The Church doesn't teach this, but that we inherited the mess caused by it, not the guilt. This error is actually rooted in translation issues between Greek and Latin.
Created:
Posted in:
From the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel...
"But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live. Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?
But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WisdomofAges
You sure do have a lot to say about the heretics.
If you were a so called "fundamentalist", you'd probably be raging about how Jesus spoke in King James English, so it is good enough for you and everyone!
Created:
Posted in:
This seems to be very different than the actions of the Latin Church and many of these churches of the reformation who didn't seem to have a problem pulling out the weed whacker.
Is the secularization of society really all that surprising? To make matters even more confusing, now if a man calls themselves a woman, people consider that valid. Self identification is proof of identity!
Well, these heresies are not really Christianity. That must really be a lousy thing to hear if you have your heart set on judging Christianity by the holy wars, inquisitions, and superstitions of the heretics!
Not real Christianity. Orthodoxy is real Christianity, and blessed are those who find it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
The seed is the truth being sown. The devil sows the weeds, which are lies.
The devil sows when we are asleep, which are the heresies and lies that creep in while we are apathetic.
The reason why we do not remove the weeds before harvest is the same reason the church does not condemn nominal members of the church or judge those outside of it. As the wheat is destroyed in the removing of the tares, so are those who might end up finding salvation be lost in the weeding out the tares.
That is what the church teaches.
So that is very different than what you are saying.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
You don't really know the God of Abraham. If you did, you'd know what I am saying is true.
And this isn't something that is totally unknown among the heterodox. It isn't something totally unknown among what is called Judaism or Islam.
But the thing is, if God is The Ultimate Reality, as I say, and you believed it, that would drastically alter how you look at all of it. The implication here especially is that you would have to admit you are wrong.
Something that a Christian is not supposed to have shame in admitting, because ours is a life of repentance. This is not considered a virtue in worldviews heavily rooted in pride.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
That isn't the meaning of that parable.
There is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.
What does that mean?
These "denominations" are not The Church.
Created:
-->
@linate
This is actually the primary heresy of the Roman "church", and the reason they are not orthodox.
That heresy is Papal Supremacy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Calvinists believe in double predestination, which basically means that you are either predestined for heaven or predestined for hell.
The Church doesn't teach this, and neither does Jesus, otherwise the very idea of repenting and turning away from sin is absurd.
What the church teaches is synergism, which means that we do have something to do with our salvation. We have free will. We can choose to reject the grace of God. It isn't forced on us.
Calvinism teaches that if you are one of the elect, nothing you do is going to change this.
Oddly enough, the church father these people cite the most, Saint Augustine.. I don't get the impression he believed in double predestination.
And truly, it is an abominable thing to teach because it could very easily lead people into spiritual apathy.
Created: