Christianity

[Nick_A]

I believe that one identical thought is to be found—expressed very precisely and with only slight differences of modality—in. . .Pythagoras, Plato, and the Greek Stoics. . .in the Upanishads, and the Bhagavad Gita; in the Chinese Taoist writings and. . .Buddhism. . .in the dogmas of the Christian faith and in the writings of the greatest Christian mystics. . .I believe that this thought is the truth, and that it today requires a modern and Western form of expression. That is to say, it should be expressed through the only approximately good thing we can call our own, namely science. This is all the less difficult because it is itself the origin of science. Simone Weil….Simone Pétrement, Simone Weil: A Life, Random House, 1976, p. 488

IC

How is a Christian to value reason? Does it limit itself to the duality of secular dualism or can reason serve the higher intellectual function of noesis? Can science support opening to noesis by exposing the contradiction duality cannot resolve? Perhaps forgetting how to reason and devolving it exclusively into critical thinking is a natural effect of modern life. Can the Bible as a psychological work serve to opening to noesis?

Why do you believe that Jesus Christ is God? Where does this belief come from and does it have biblical support

John 14

9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me?

Ephesians 1

9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me?

It seems logical to me that the Christ is in the level of the Father and Man is within the level of the Christ. It is basic to the vertical Great Chain of Being. But somehow you believe that God and the Christ are the same. Is this the result of the belief that Jesus said I and the Father are ONE? But as I understand it they are the expression of unity. Man on the other hand isn't one. Man is many. The whole purpose of Christianity is for Man to become one.

You take this idea as some obscure sect of Gnosticism but look how many were drawn to Platonic Christianity. Maybe there is far more to Christianity than we understand at the exoteric level and perhaps when science studies the Great Chain of being will lead to opening to the complimentary relationship of science and religion rather than the foolish fighting existing now.

http://www.john-uebersax.com/plato/cp.htm

The following is a list of Christian philosophers, theologians, and writers with Platonist/Neoplatonist interests or influences. Their main works, and especially those relevant to the topic of Christian Platonist spirituality, are also shown.
Note the literal explosion of interest in Christian Platonism during the Renaissance, followed by a striking absence from 1700 until the 20th century. The latter reflects several factors: the Reformation, the Age of Reason, the Industrial Revolution, and the modern empiricist- materialistic worldview. In a post-modern world we may expect to see Renaissance humanism and mysticism re-emerge, and along with them Platonism and Christian Platonism............

[Immanuel Can]

How is a Christian to value reason?

I'm not sure I understand the question. Everybody with an ounce of sense values reason.

But I don't believe in esoteric "knowledge."

Why do you believe that Jesus Christ is God? Where does this belief come from and does it have biblical support

Rather than going through this at length, maybe I can just refer you to the myriad websites that cover this very basic territory. You can judge their cases for yourself. https://www.openbible.info/topics/jesus_is_god

[Belinda]

Is there a definitive event , such as the Resurrection event, that defines Christian doctrine?

[Immanuel Can]

Is there a definitive event , such as the Resurrection event, that defines Christian doctrine?

"Defines"? I'm not quite sure what that means, B. That's not the verb one ordinarily uses with a view to the word "doctrine."

Do you mean something like, "Is there an event around which Christian doctrine is organized," perhaps? In that case, the Resurrection of Jesus Christ would be the best candidate, since it is crucial to the whole and has implications for a whole lot of other doctrine.

[Alexis Jacobi]

But the Catholic Church has not taken this to heart. They have made the dicates of the Popes and Councils their definitive authority, and all of God's word to be maleable in their hands. Is that "Christian"? Well, not if you take "Christian" to mean "following Christ" in a matter.

*The Church* is a very very large thing, with existence that spans much time, and is composed of thousands and thousands of people who, in your *aspirational* sense, have lived out their faith.

I disagree that *they* or *it* regard scripture as malleable, in the sense you mean it, and reading Catholic theology -- the sort I respect because it is profoundly thought-through and reasoned-through -- my understanding is that it is there, in that, in those processes, when a Spirit of intelligence enters in, and results in conclusions that are based in soundness. It is then a question for the reader (of that theology) to work through the arguments and accept the conclusions. As to the (I think mistaken) notion of 'papal infallibility' it is the theologians that actually explain what is meant by that. But it is also written out, reasonably, that it is a Catholic and a Christian's duty not to obey if the order is wrongly-based.

In my own case I began my studies (in the Catholic traditions) with a reading of The Destruction of the Christian Tradition by Rama Coomaraswamy. And I came to this book and this study because as I said I was investigating everything that had to do with the emergent right-leaning, right-oriented, alt-right, conservative right, dissident right, far-right, extreme-right factions. So, among those who define themselves as *traditionalists* (influenced by René Guénon and perhaps also by Julius Evola) often are resorted to for larger, metaphysically-based critiques of 'the errors of modernity''.

So my first view of Catholicism was through Coomaraswamy's critical analysis of the incursion of Modernism in respect to the processes that led to Vatican ll. Thereafter I also researched and listened to those in the traditional Catholicism movement which take extremely strong stances against the present corruption in the Church and of course in the liturgy.

Personally, I think you are substantially wrong in your assessment about Traditional Catholics and Traditional Catholicism. They are acutely interested in the core scriptural truths and for this reason a *common ground* can easily be found between Christians of different strains if they succeed in understanding what that ground really is.

I should point out that I actually read the Catechism of the Council of Trent as I was undertaking my research. I also found that the publisher Benziger Brothers often had some of the better and more *substantial* books that outlined Catholic/Christian doctrine. What most interested my was not complex theological treatises but the ones that outlined what a solid, committed Christian life entailed. Generally speaking I found these unimpeachable. The other thing I focused on was the traditional Catholic (also published by Benziger) breviary. And the various titles I found that compiled the Christian hymns, many of them very very old and going back to the earliest times. I found these hymns very interesting to study because, in their simple declarations, they outline what Christian belief actually is.

So as you can see I have no choice but to oppose your opinion on these matters by 180 degrees. The Breviary does nothing much more than quote selections from the Gospels, and some of the OT, in an ordered, processional series that proceeds through the weeks, months and seasons of the year. It is quintessentially Christian and it is inconceivable how someone could describe it as something else.

But little of these descriptions touches much on my own *inner relationship*. I feel perhaps a bit like Jules: "I'm trying Ringo, I'm trying real hard!"

Sorry, it is your fault from making a reference to Airplane . . . You know these things get started and never end . . .

[Immanuel Can]

But the Catholic Church has not taken this to heart. They have made the dicates of the Popes and Councils their definitive authority, and all of God's word to be maleable in their hands. Is that "Christian"? Well, not if you take "Christian" to mean "following Christ" in a matter.

*The Church* is a very very large thing, with existence that spans much time, and is composed of thousands and thousands of people who, in your *aspirational* sense, have lived out their faith.

I think you're mixing two things here, Alexis: the question of whether or not a doctrine is right, and the question of the sincerity of those who follow it.

A person can be sincerely wrong.

I disagree that *they* or *it* regard scripture as malleable,

Well, they do. In fact, they pride themselves on it. They speak of Protestants as following a "dead" tradition, and claim that the malleability of theirs makes it a "living" one. You see, they think they have a "living" authority in the Popes and councils, and other Christians don't. And they aren't shy about how the various councils and Popes have been permitted to mutate doctrine, since they see the clergy as having coequal (or even greater) authority than the texts.

For example, Catholic sources themselves will tell you that Mary, who is the centerpiece of Catholicism, wasn't declared "mother of God" until the 5th Century. The Mass wasn't established as transusbstantiation (its core doctrine) until the 12th Century, and Purgatory was invented around the same time. So just ask the Catholic historians when they did what they did, and you'll see I'm right.

You'll find that Catholicism employs a great number of terms that Christians use, such as "grace," "faith," "salvation," and "gospel," but each with a meaning attached that is different from the Protestants. But you'd need to drill down into the doctrine to see that difference. They also have their own vocabulary, not used by Protestants, such as "indulgence," "penance," "assumption," and so on. Each of these indicates a doctrine that the Protestants actively reject.

Do people sincerely follow Catholicism? Sure. Does that make Catholicism right? That's a different question.

Sorry, it is your fault from making a reference to Airplane . . . You know these things get started and never end . . .

Here's you cookie for getting it right.

[Belinda]

Is there a definitive event , such as the Resurrection event, that defines Christian doctrine?

"Defines"? I'm not quite sure what that means, B. That's not the verb one ordinarily uses with a view to the word "doctrine."

Do you mean something like, "Is there an event around which Christian doctrine is organized," perhaps? In that case, the Resurrection of Jesus Christ would be the best candidate, since it is crucial to the whole and has implications for a whole lot of other doctrine.

A definitive event defines what is A and what is not-A

[Nick_A]

Is there a definitive event , such as the Resurrection event, that defines Christian doctrine?

"People should not worry as much about what they do but rather about what they are. If they and their ways are good, then their deeds are radiant. If you are righteous, then what you do will also be righteous. We should not think that holiness is based on what we do but rather on what we are, for it is not our works which sanctify us but we who sanctify our works." Meister Eckhart

I believe there is a definitive result which defines Christianity. It doesn't refer to what a person DOES but rather what they ARE. But appreciating this requires distinguishing between the inner man (essence) and the outer man (personality)

The Christian teaching or an interpreted Christendom you experience in the world is all directed at our personality. It concerns what we do. The essence of Christianity is our essence and its goal is to awaken what we ARE. Even those close to Jesus didn't understand this:

Luke 13

Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. 2 Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? 3 I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. 4 Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.”

Repent is translated wrongly here. Jesus is referring to metanoia or the inner change of mind.

Two books which helped me understand the parables are Maurice Nicoll's "the New Man" and also "The Mark". This excerpt is from the New Man and describes the purpose of Christianity.

The Gospels speak mainly of a possible inner evolution called "re-birth". This is their central idea. ... The Gospels are from beginning to end all about this possible self-evolution. They are psychological documents. They are about the psychology of this possible inner development --that is, about what a man must think, feel, and do in order to reach a new level of understanding. ... Everyone has an outer side that has been developed by his contact with life and an inner side which remains vague, uncertain, undeveloped. ... For that reason the teaching of inner evolution must be so formed that it does not fall solely on the outer side of man. It must fall there first, but be capable of penetrating more deeply and awakening the man himself --the inner, unorganized man. A man evolves internally through his deeper reflection, not through his outer life-controlled side. He evolves through the spirit of his understanding and by inner consent to what he sees as truth. The psychological meanings of the relatively fragmentary teaching recorded in the Gospels refers to this deeper, inner side of everyone.

- Maurice Nicoll; The New Man

Christianity with the help of the Spirit attempts to heal our disorganized inner man. The world rejects it since it only is concerned with what a person does. Yet there are some willing to consciously struggle with their personality in order to feel their essence. The help of the Holy Spirit makes it possible.

[Immanuel Can]

Is there a definitive event , such as the Resurrection event, that defines Christian doctrine?

"Defines"? I'm not quite sure what that means, B. That's not the verb one ordinarily uses with a view to the word "doctrine."

Do you mean something like, "Is there an event around which Christian doctrine is organized," perhaps? In that case, the Resurrection of Jesus Christ would be the best candidate, since it is crucial to the whole and has implications for a whole lot of other doctrine.

A definitive event defines what is A and what is not-A

So...the Resurrection would define one as a Christian or not? Or it would define Christ as Messiah or not? Or some connection to it would define a thing as "doctrine" or not?

You're going to have to help me to see what you're "defining" thereby. Normally, "events" don't "define."

[Belinda]

Is there a definitive event , such as the Resurrection event, that defines Christian doctrine?

"People should not worry as much about what they do but rather about what they are. If they and their ways are good, then their deeds are radiant. If you are righteous, then what you do will also be righteous. We should not think that holiness is based on what we do but rather on what we are, for it is not our works which sanctify us but we who sanctify our works." Meister Eckhart

I believe there is a definitive result which defines Christianity. It doesn't refer to what a person DOES but rather what they ARE. But appreciating this requires distinguishing between the inner man (essence) and the outer man (personality)

The Christian teaching or an interpreted Christendom you experience in the world is all directed at our personality. It concerns what we do. The essence of Christianity is our essence and its goal is to awaken what we ARE. Even those close to Jesus didn't understand this:

Luke 13

Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. 2 Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? 3 I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. 4 Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.”

Repent is translated wrongly here. Jesus is referring to metanoia or the inner change of mind.

Two books which helped me understand the parables are Maurice Nicoll's "the New Man" and also "The Mark". This excerpt is from the New Man and describes the purpose of Christianity.

The Gospels speak mainly of a possible inner evolution called "re-birth". This is their central idea. ... The Gospels are from beginning to end all about this possible self-evolution. They are psychological documents. They are about the psychology of this possible inner development --that is, about what a man must think, feel, and do in order to reach a new level of understanding. ... Everyone has an outer side that has been developed by his contact with life and an inner side which remains vague, uncertain, undeveloped. ... For that reason the teaching of inner evolution must be so formed that it does not fall solely on the outer side of man. It must fall there first, but be capable of penetrating more deeply and awakening the man himself --the inner, unorganized man. A man evolves internally through his deeper reflection, not through his outer life-controlled side. He evolves through the spirit of his understanding and by inner consent to what he sees as truth. The psychological meanings of the relatively fragmentary teaching recorded in the Gospels refers to this deeper, inner side of everyone.

- Maurice Nicoll; The New Man

Christianity with the help of the Spirit attempts to heal our disorganized inner man. The world rejects it since it only is concerned with what a person does. Yet there are some willing to consciously struggle with their personality in order to feel their essence. The help of the Holy Spirit makes it possible.

I would have thought that repentance gives you a chance moment by moment to be new man.

[Belinda]

"Defines"? I'm not quite sure what that means, B. That's not the verb one ordinarily uses with a view to the word "doctrine."

Do you mean something like, "Is there an event around which Christian doctrine is organized," perhaps? In that case, the Resurrection of Jesus Christ would be the best candidate, since it is crucial to the whole and has implications for a whole lot of other doctrine.

A definitive event defines what is A and what is not-A

So...the Resurrection would define one as a Christian or not? Or it would define Christ as Messiah or not? Or some connection to it would define a thing as "doctrine" or not?

You're going to have to help me to see what you're "defining" thereby. Normally, "events" don't "define."

Yes, they do. A definitive performance of 'Jane Eyre' sets the standard for subsequent performances of 'Jane Eyre'. A religion is not only a written document such as The Bible it's a performance by doers of the Word.The life of Jesus of Nazareth is definitive for millions of people.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I would have thought that repentance gives you a chance moment by moment to be new man.

Repentance is I think a very interesting topic. I would say that a major part of my own (excuse that wretched word) 'process' in relation to divinity and the Christian path has been in essence one of 'repentance'. And I mean self-revision, revision of my family and the trajectory of my family, examination and revision of my culture, the culture I grew up in, and many many other things. And then there is the element of my own relation to these things, and of course my own actions, involvements, behavior, *crimes & misdemeanors*.

To enter in to a (spiritual) process of repentance is in my view another facet of a mysticism, a mystical relationship. If I were a Jungian I might say *higher self*. From the Vedantic perspective something similar: Self. I think it is at the point when one's *process* (what one understands to be going on) is defined as between the soul and Divinity that those of atheistic bent just can't make that leap. So they have to describe it in other terms.

In Catholicism, of course, it is best described as penance and is rather involved . . .

[Immanuel Can]

The life of Jesus of Nazareth is definitive for millions of people.

Explain exactly what it "defines."

[Immanuel Can]

I would have thought that repentance gives you a chance moment by moment to be new man.

Repentance is I think a very interesting topic.

Could you explain what you understand the word to mean?

There are at least two quite different precise theological definitions, plus some more informal, colloquial alternatives; so I have to ask.

[Belinda]

The life of Jesus of Nazareth is definitive for millions of people.

Explain exactly what it "defines."

That depends on which interpretation has been learned. For instance when I was a small child at Sunday School there was a very large coloured picture on the wall, of Jesus with a lot of children clustered affectionately around him, one of them sitting on his knee, another leaning against him. I am sure that picture influenced me a great deal that Jesus is a loving and trustworthy mentor. Now I am more sophisticated I retain the early feelings and add my more recently acquired scepticism.

In actual fact nearly all adults , if they introspect enough, see that they are no wiser than little children pretending to themselves that they are this or that role they are playing at, but they aren't. We are lost and seek certainty about who we really are but we never find that certainty, we only think we do. For instance you think you are certain that you are really a 'Christian'. You don't realise that this is a role you identify with. The dentist, the mother, the judge, the criminal, the communist, the failure, the rich man, all come to identify themselves with these roles. But they are not these roles. At the moment of their deaths and forever after only the Recording Angel knows the full story .