|
Azathoth posted:Oh you are absolutely fine. The reason that I wanted to bring that up is that particular passage has been used in a lot of lovely ways (like committing suicide is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, as the Holy Spirit gives life, and so that is why someone who commits suicide is damned to conscious eternal torture spoilered for discussing self harm). I think that it's also tied to pride: like "this love comes from me and only me, I am the radiant source of light". Rather than something that's everywhere and in everything, and merely reflected in us and us in it. "Turning away and touching are both wrong, for it is like a massive fire"
|
# ? Apr 12, 2024 22:08 |
|
|
# ? Apr 30, 2024 01:26 |
|
LITERALLY A BIRD posted:I fully appreciate the affectionate amusement provided by me being Tillich's Biggest Fan while seated at the polytheism table, but I think the above excerpt does an excellent job of articulating some of his ways of thinking that clearly participated in people like me being able to derive wisdom and guidance from his work. God the Father is humanity, Jesus is Project YorHa (or specifically No. 9 if you're into that Deep Lore), and the Holy Spirit is the pod network
|
# ? Apr 12, 2024 22:32 |
|
Paramemetic posted:God the Father is humanity, Jesus is Project YorHa (or specifically No. 9 if you're into that Deep Lore), and the Holy Spirit is the pod network I can neither confirm nor deny this particular speculative metaphor Ohtori Akio posted:judaism is pretty specific about the monotheism so in that context the holy spirit is a created non god entity which acts as intermediary but i couldn't go into specifics beyond that. Azathoth posted:There is a theory of the Holy Spirit which holds that she is what arises out of the interaction between God the Father and God the Son, which would be reasonably consistent with what you wrote there. In other words, the Holy Spirit is the way we experience Jesus and thus the Father, who is entirely transcendent and cannot be experienced in a rational way. I'm not sure I buy it, but your post made me think of it. I think you are both referring to a very similar interpretation of the Spirit here, which is one that I perceive to be an accurate perception but not a complete one. To Ohtori's point on Judaism, I think it's relevant that the monotheism there is designed around Yahweh actively proscribing the worship of any and all other Gods: for the Spirit to be recognized as a God itself would violate the covenant between the God of the Israelites and his people, but since the Spirit is Divinity the reality of it must be acknowledged in some manner, and thereby it becomes the inanimate power of "God," as opposed to the living energy and essence that powers anything we call "God." You and I are doing some interesting folding back and forth of each other's thoughts/ideas, Az, because while I also don't buy that the Spirit is what arises through interactions of/with the Father and Son, exactly, again I think that is part of it and get why my post reminded you of that. If you remember the way I've said in A/T that the Spirit, how it is perceived and described as something ever-present, subtle, but unmistakably holy, reminds me very much of how my religion experiences the Divine multi-concept ma'at, this still holds true. And while perceiving ma'at as the result of interaction with the Divine is correct, it denies the remainder of the entire body of ma'at, shrinks our perspective from the Divine that suffuses everything and exists still further beyond everything to simply the part of it we see through the pinhole of our relationship with Deity. From my perspective, claiming the Spirit is a mere procession of the Deities who embody it, and not acknowledging that it is "the God beyond God" itself, is the first thing that comes to mind with the Christ's admonition against blasphemy. Ohtori Akio posted:i think its very charming that Christ spoke in riddles and our engagement with the scriptures about him is now discerning what in the gently caress he meant by some of that it's hard to communicate sacred truths in plain language, I get it. but man, yeah, two thousand years later, feel like a little less rhetoric might have really behooved us in places
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 00:30 |
|
i remarked to a good friend the other day that we might spend less time chewing on the ideas if Christ had done more chewing for us
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 00:34 |
|
i feel like for this conversation to be fruitful there should be some statement as to whether someone is talking about their interpretation of what second temple jews or early christians thought the holy spirit was or their own interpretation of what the holy spirit is, in actuality (or some third option)
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 00:36 |
|
yeah my own idea of what the holy spirit is, is distinct from what lab's saying and from how i think second temple israelites thought of it and hell its different from the average pentecostal. the holy spirit is intensely subjective so thats part of the difficulty of discussing it unfortunately.
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 00:39 |
|
Okay, see this? That one on the right is where I am. I am saying that "the Spirit" is the whole oval, but "the Father" and "the Son" are mere circle-sized, along with every other "God"/Deity. However my opponents declare that, should they even deign acknowledgement of my absurd panentheistic reality model (classic theism is on the left), "the Father" is the big one, probably "the Son" too, they're not really all that sure about "the Spirit" at all actually; that one could be either.
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 00:42 |
|
also, again, the Spirit gives us magic. That's the same Spirit for everyone. This is very important here, in the witchcraft thread.
LITERALLY A BIRD has issued a correction as of 02:48 on Apr 13, 2024 |
# ? Apr 13, 2024 00:44 |
|
A Trinitarian way to look at it is: The Father is Being itself, the Son is the Ground of Being, and the Spirit is Being in each of us who are the siblings of the Son and children of the Father.
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 00:47 |
|
i thought the holy spirit was the sun
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 00:48 |
|
!!! Hey BRD
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 00:48 |
|
BONGHITZ posted:i thought the holy spirit was the sun The Sun is a powerful and terrifying magician e: my phone kept fighting me to auto-capitalize "Sun" which I really don't think I taught it on purpose LITERALLY A BIRD has issued a correction as of 00:55 on Apr 13, 2024 |
# ? Apr 13, 2024 00:50 |
|
da freakin trinity ftw.
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 01:01 |
Ohtori Akio posted:i remarked to a good friend the other day that we might spend less time chewing on the ideas if Christ had done more chewing for us i don't think that jesus meant to die when and where he did at all. the word is incomplete for better or for worse
|
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 01:19 |
|
Jazerus posted:i don't think that jesus meant to die when and where he did at all. the word is incomplete for better or for worse now thats a heresy ive never seen before lol
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 01:29 |
|
Jazerus posted:i don't think that jesus meant to die when and where he did at all. the word is incomplete for better or for worse there were and still are plenty of people who understand it extremely well. understand it like looking at their hand, and to them it is complete. I think that's partially why martyrdom was so important to the early church. If there's moral fearlessness in outward conduct, and you face your internal fear, frailty, vanity, etc in a painful death, there's not a patch of ground to stand on. Any hard-earned understanding is right there for you
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 01:35 |
|
Ohtori Akio posted:now thats a heresy ive never seen before lol lol i thought the same thing and then wondered why as someone raised christian but became an atheist i'm still so protective of little o orthodoxy
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 01:41 |
Ohtori Akio posted:now thats a heresy ive never seen before lol it's fairly obvious in the synoptic gospels imo. for whatever reason the idea that jesus meant to die exactly when he did is pervasive but the synoptics make it pretty clear that he was taken off-guard by the arrest and execution. if that's the case then there's no way he didn't plan to keep going right? the trip to jerusalem was a field trip and after he would have gone back to galilee to keep up the usual shenanigans. so not all of his thoughts made it out into the world. i don't think it's something christians particularly like to think about for whatever reason but any time someone dies by sudden violence there's poo poo left unsaid and undone
|
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 01:43 |
|
the death is the event though.
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 01:45 |
sure but i'm not a christian and not viewing it through that lens. the death is the central event of the theology - but how could it be anything but a premature end to what the man, jesus, planned to do and say?
|
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 01:50 |
|
it seems pretty clear that if you believe he was divine he meant to do it and if you don't he probably didn't
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 01:52 |
|
Sherbert Hoover posted:it seems pretty clear that if you believe he was divine he meant to do it and if you don't he probably didn't this op
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 01:56 |
|
also the pauline epistles rest on some idea of a voluntary sacrifice as a basis for humanity's salvation, so the doctrine of atonement was already formed prior to the writing of the synoptic gospels
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 01:59 |
|
you can say plan to have lunch next week, but you know that you're going to be murdered by the mafia at any point as well, because you've decided to tell the truth about something. so it's partially a product of language, as that's very different in significance than say he was planning to be the jewish political messiah and he was shocked that it didn't pan out
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 02:03 |
|
Jazerus posted:- but how could it be anything but a premature end to what the man, jesus, planned to do and say? it’s the big L. an embarrassing total and complete destruction. But it’s not just him. I’m partial to the idea that the gospels are written down by different communities as the war progresses. The Romans are crucifying lots of people as they put down the revolt. The world is ending for these communities there are lots of crosses. They have to pick which story they are going to tell and how that story is structured. The story inverts being crushed by power.
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 02:11 |
|
one of the most problematic things about the criterion of embarrassment for determining what of the gospels is historical is that the embarrassment of the story is clearly a meaningful part of the text. it's all about inversions of expectation
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 02:17 |
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:it’s the big L. an embarrassing total and complete destruction. luke-acts is relentless in this, esp in portrayals of royalty and divinity of christ. there are a ton of v nuänced juxtapositions of power/glory w various forms of opposite
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 03:24 |
Sherbert Hoover posted:i feel like for this conversation to be fruitful there should be some statement as to whether someone is talking about their interpretation of what second temple jews or early christians thought the holy spirit was or their own interpretation of what the holy spirit is, in actuality (or some third option) The idea that the Holy Spirit arises out of the interaction between God the Father and God the Son is modern-ish theology. I don't know the specific history, but I think it is post-Enlightenment. Also, just to be clear, it's not what I hold myself, I'm a very boring little-o orthodox trinitarian. Ohtori Akio posted:now thats a heresy ive never seen before lol It's a reasonably common view among historical Jesus scholars and pretty consistent with the synoptic Gospel's witness. Jesus straight up says that he doesn't know when he's returning, so we have a canonical statement that he doesn't have foreknowledge of at least one thing. It stands to reason that if he doesn't know that, he might not know other stuff. Personally, I'm ambivalent on it, I don't think it really matters if Jesus knew from the start he was going to die at that exact time and place and went about his business anyways or if he got got unexpectedly. He was perfectly following the will of God the Father in either case. If I had to pick, I'd say he didn't know because part of the experience of being human is having limited knowledge and perspective. If he was at all times tapped into divine knowledge, that's closer to the docetic heresy than Arianism or adoptionism or any of the other early heresies that try to make Jesus a lesser being.
|
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 04:20 |
|
LITERALLY A BIRD posted:I've found you an excellent method for casting out demons, in the name of fan favorite deity Jesus the Christ to help keep mainstream practitioners comfortable. So now all you need to do is find someone who is currently possessed by a succubus spirit, exorcise them, and then I guess recapture and/or strike a consensual deal with the newly manifest succubus entity, for fellatio. Then you should be all set. i already killed the coptic in my head gently caress off
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 09:40 |
|
Trash Ops posted:i already killed the coptic in my head gently caress off copt and seetht
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 16:18 |
|
Trash Ops posted:i already killed the coptic in my head gently caress off What're you replacing him with, friend? Here's a giant Tillich essay for people who may be interested in it. RELIGIOUS RELATIVISM: PAUL TILLICH'S "LAST WORD" O. Douglas Schwarz, 1986 quote:I. Introduction quote:II. "Basic" Tillich quote:III. "Encountering" the World Religions quote:IV. The "Last Word" quote:V. Afterword
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 16:28 |
|
Thanks for sharing. That isn't far from stuff that I've seen expressed in people who have practiced other religions deeply. Hakuin's discipline Torei Enji viewed Buddhism as basically a technology, and beyond that, a symptom of a sickness. So animist views like in Shinto alone were totally adequate in the distant past, as people's lives were simple and harsh, and people could grasp things in that method. But it became something of a shadow of its former self as people became less connected to nature. Then later on there were currents like Confucianism, Vedic Brahmanism, Taoism etc that better allowed people to infer the truth in new, more complex contexts. But the main current of worldly life adapted to those too, and their radical power was to some degree left behind. And that's mirrored within Buddhism: practicing in the way outlined in the Agamas and in Theravada Buddhism was supposed to put one on the trajectory towards seeing the purpose behind all of it. Eventually the Lotus Sutra was like finally like okay, people are really screwing up, mask off. The core teaching is compassion. Words and religious texts are only provisional tricks (symbols), learning and growing must be assumed to be a continuous process that extends forever, everyone has something to teach us, even the worst people. And even that was corrupted into something that is largely compartmentalized and put on a shelf. It will ultimately die out without people to rekindle it and embody it. Despite the fact that there was an apparent supercession of views, he didn't think that it invalidated earlier ones. So in Torei's mind, a person who sees clearly, and really embodies the teachings of say Shinto is in a way better state than the vast, vast majority of Buddhists, even though the later derives from "higher" teachings. nice obelisk idiot has issued a correction as of 21:42 on Apr 13, 2024 |
# ? Apr 13, 2024 17:42 |
|
Tillich uses the phrasing “the event of Jesus as the Christ” consistently. I don’t think “suppose” is strong enough , “event” is referring to Jesus on the cross. Sartre has an idea think is useful, the “concrete universal”. Think of the concrete universal like a platonic form that is a existing thing. Sartre argues that building the concrete universal is the goal of the philosopher and the atheists real final project. And this is used to move existentialism into a humanism (and socialism). Religion has a ground of Being which is the concrete universal and but it is a content of revelation. it’s not built (because it’s impossible to build it) it’s spoken by God as revelation. that’s the event. His definition of faith as Ultimate Concern is structurally identical to Sartre’s Final Project (Tillich is first though and the two are ontologically inverted). The event is the object of Ultimate Concern for Tillich, and “there may be -- and I stress this, there may be -- “ is his doubt in it. but if one looks at his writings on Origen and the development of the Logos doctrine, this idea of relativism comes up while he is lecturing at Harvard. The reason Origen isn’t a church Father despite assembling the canon and creating theology as a thing (advancing the logos doctrine from Apology to systematic theology) is because Origen’s cosmology had the potential open for other hypostasis. In reaction to that potential and eventually adopted at Nicea there is a reaction. Tillich ends the lecture on Origen describing how Origen’s theology causes a problem with Jesus having a preexisting existing divine nature, instead Jesus is like a container that fills up with Being then has unity with God. He ends that lecture with this: “This of course is the negation of the Divine nature of the Savior. This shows what made him a heretic, although many people of that time and perhaps even of today would prefer to follow him.” I think in “perhaps even of today” he is referring to himself. If he does share this with Origen that’s the door, it doesn’t negate the event of Jesus, it potentially negates the uniqueness of the event of Jesus as the Christ. There could be other revealed concrete universals. Bar Ran Dun has issued a correction as of 18:07 on Apr 13, 2024 |
# ? Apr 13, 2024 18:02 |
|
how do i cast a loving spell
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 18:59 |
|
Farg posted:how do i cast a loving spell LITERALLY A BIRD posted:I've found you an excellent method for casting out demons, in the name of fan favorite deity Jesus the Christ to help keep mainstream practitioners comfortable. So now all you need to do is find someone who is currently possessed by a succubus spirit, exorcise them, and then I guess recapture and/or strike a consensual deal with the newly manifest succubus entity, for fellatio. Then you should be all set.
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 19:11 |
|
LITERALLY A BIRD posted:
this is applying the basic dialectic of apotropaïc mysticism to academic theology. its ambiguöus only if you come at it from the academic angle—approaching it as mysticism makes it uh not subtle
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 19:15 |
|
We cast spells every day. It's just that, if we thought of it that way, we'd be like "dang, why do i keep casting these lovely rear end spells"
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 21:35 |
|
sounds like your posts no..?
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 21:37 |
|
I stand before you all now as a poster, owned
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 21:43 |
|
|
# ? Apr 30, 2024 01:26 |
|
sit down
|
# ? Apr 13, 2024 21:45 |