Christianity and saving the West from itself

[Nimbostratus]

Much better than Christianity: Neo-Platonism.

Neo-Platonism withouth the Christian heresy is the best. Throw away things Judeo and Jesus, and you will only have what's cool and nice in Catholicism and Orthodoxy. Why do we need Jesus? To save the herd with a zombie tale just because Neoplatonism is too hard to grasp?

[fallot]

Much better in appeal to your reason you mean, certainly not something you can build around. Whether you are derisive of it or not, one is solidified into your heritage and the other really isn't. That is what I believe.

What are you willing to sacrifice? Sexual freedoms? Marijuana? What are you prepared to change; what change are you prepared to accept if it leads us to heights?

[Athanasius contra mundum]

The complaints levied against the passion of our Lord and Savior read like the speculations of the philosophically illiterate. Whining and crying? Please try to use less paltry terminology when discussing a central doctrine to an institution that has accumulated over 2,000 years of experience and learning. Christ's sacrifice was the unification of the spiritual with the material and was undertaken for the sole purpose of making theosis possible. In the context of the sacrifice of the Eucharist, a necessary component of the Christian Faith to all but heretics, this is the exact opposite of a doctrine that expects nothing out of you.

[Von List]

Hessians kneeling before the peace maker



this is rich

[Jim Necroslaughter]

but I'm almost certain that without the support of a movement in clergy, eventually you'll end up with a different facet of the same thing. Yet who will do it? Who will enter the Churches to change them from the inside? Who will assert the fundamentalism, the rigid application of neccessary truth?

I just want to point one thing out.  I am pretty sure that within Catholicism, you can enter into the clergy at any age, and even if you have a wife or children (not 100% certain about the wife thing, but pretty certain - I think the key is you have to be married BEFORE you decide to enter the clergy).  There are ways around everything, even in the Catholic Church.  Some priests can even be relieved of their vows if the Pope allows it.  So the point here, is that entering the priesthood and changing it from within isn't necessarily what most people think it is.  For lack of a better term, a man could theoretically have his cake and eat it too.  Basically, live a normal worldly life, then enter the priesthood at say 40-50.  There are two kinds of priests, the ones who do the normal daily sermons for community churches, and then the more "scholarly" ones like the Jesuits.  The second type of priest would be the one to help change the church from within.  If you were extremely intelligent, ambitious, and adventurous, it would be an interesting prospect in my opinion.  You would have to be well planned out, dedicated, and constantly playing politics to pull it off, though.  I actually think it would be quite a life.  And obviously, you couldn't rise through the ranks by fooling people, you would have to truly believe in your mission.  You'd have to do it for the truly right reasons.

[Nimbostratus]

The complaints levied against the passion of our Lord and Savior read like the speculations of the philosophically illiterate. Whining and crying? Please try to use less paltry terminology when discussing a central doctrine to an institution that has accumulated over 2,000 years of experience and learning. Christ's sacrifice was the unification of the spiritual with the material and was undertaken for the sole purpose of making theosis possible. In the context of the sacrifice of the Eucharist, a necessary component of the Christian Faith to all but heretics, this is the exact opposite of a doctrine that expects nothing out of you.

I'm not ignoring Aquinas, or Anselm, or Augustine, but I would like to know exactly, what the judeo-christian scriptures have contributed for the good of the greco-roman/pagan thinking.

In terms of theology, I see an Eckhart weakened by Christianity, and I admire his incredible effort to make his wonderful elaborations to fit in the poverty of the new testament. In the past, I defended Christianity, but the more I listen to my hearth and my spiritual intuition, the more I feel the need to burn the chaff of Christ.

[Conservationist]

Possibly a tool of evolution.

Thinking about religion gives people more self-control on later, unrelated tasks; according to results from a series of recent Queen's University study.

"After unscrambling sentences containing religiously oriented words, participants in our studies exercised significantly more self-control," says psychology graduate student and lead researcher on the study, Kevin Rounding.

Study participants were given a sentence containing five words to unscramble. Some contained religious themes and others did not. After unscrambling the sentences, participants were asked to complete a number of tasks that required self-control -- enduring discomfort, delaying gratification, exerting patience, and refraining from impulsive responses.

Participants who had unscrambled the sentences containing religious themes had more self-control in completing their tasks.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120124113045.htm#.TyDRts_pdt0.facebook

Every human tribe evolved religion for a reason. Or several.

1. Social control
2. Explain that which is beyond material
3. Focus on transcendental goal

We need #3 in both religion and philosophy.

[WAAAAAAGH!]

Good luck with #3. You're going to have to kill off a few solas to do it. Specifically Sola Fide.