You have two choices, one decidedly RHP and one decidedly LHP.

On the Right, you have Christianity, particularly of the Orthodox or Catholic varieties. Per Christianity's internal logic and history, these are the most true to form. If you disagree or a gnosticism sperg, just assume this is so.

On the Left, you have a more mystical, personal, and less moralistic interaction with reality. Say, a more Advaita or Neoplatonic. More philosophical, and with potential for self-deification (not as capital 'G' God perhaps, but as a contingent deity. Basically CHIM from Morrowind kek.

Which do you see as being more likely? Discuss thoughtfully.

Consider that both paradigms claim to be an ancient prisca theologica. Everyone recognizes (with the exception of some schizo larpers who never get anywhere) that capital Truth is perennial in the sense that it blooms in every age according to the aeon.

Now Truth leaving deposits everywhere, every claimant to the pristine theology will have an answer to how to synthesize it within the fullness of their tradition.

Putting aside for a moment whatever questions you have about exclusiveness, a deep and objective investigation on the LHP side should show you that 99% of it is utter bullshit. In some sense there are really only two serious options - Christianity or Hinduism - dualism or pantheism. Only one can be right.

>>40517003 (OP)
you have presented a false dichotomy, and even in that false choice you have a severe lack of understanding and variety within the two.
I completely disagree with your surface level understanding of the paths, and what they entail.

>>40517003 (OP)
I hate to break it to you anon, but not everyone who calls themselves a christian is following the rhp. there are plenty of good followers in other faith systems as well. Your dichotomy is flawed and paper-thin in depth.

>>40517137
>>40517139
I don't seem to understand what a "false dichotomy" is. I implore you to re-read what I actually wrote. I have presented two options of many that are, in reality, available. I have not made the claim that they are your only two choices in reality, or to pick one as true. I'm asking you to discuss which is more likely of the two, which is perfectly reasonable.

Orthodoxy and Catholicism are axiomatically made the "correct" forms of Christianity, because Protestantism and esoteric Christianity doesn't preclude other possibilities out of necessity. For the sake of brevity. I'm asking you to discuss and compare two options of several.

The latter option, I admit, is less clear definitionally. I have grouped metaphysical schools like Neoplatonism and Advaita Vedanta together. These are, however and of themselves, in clear and staunch opposition to the first option.

>>40517115
I appreciate your response and agree somewhat. I am at a crossroads between Christianity's theistic dualism and a kind of panentheism (rather than pantheism).

>>40517137
>>40517139
You don't seem to understand what a "false dichotomy" is. I implore you to re-read what I actually wrote. I have presented two options of many that are, in reality, available. I have not made the claim that they are your only two choices in reality, or to pick one as true. I'm asking you to discuss which is more likely of the two, which is perfectly reasonable.

Orthodoxy and Catholicism are presented because Protestantism and esoteric Christianity don't preclude other possibilities out of necessity. These two, however, do preclude any nondualism and/or potential for self-deification if they, themselves are true.

The latter option, I admit, is less clear definitionally. I have grouped metaphysical schools like Neoplatonism and Advaita Vedanta together. These are, however and of themselves, in clear and staunch opposition to the first option. I suppose I am talking about nondualism more broadly.

>>40517115
I appreciate your response and agree somewhat. I am at a crossroads between Christianity's theistic dualism and a kind of panentheism (rather than pantheism)

>>40517175
>I don't seem to understand what a "false dichotomy" is.
You can only like chocolate ice cream, or orange sherbet. If you like chocolate, you hate orange sherbet - and vice versa.
A simple and blatant false dichotomy.
I am saying those are not the only two choices.
>I'm asking you to discuss which is more likely of the two
Neither. I reject your pairing and your myopia.
>axiomatically made the "correct" forms
I disagree this was needed, or useful. That is the point of my post.
>These are, however and of themselves, in clear and staunch opposition to the first option.
No they arent. Much of the New Testament itself is in line with Neoplatonism.

And what a egotistic, bullshit edit to change the truth that YOU dont know what a false dichotomy is, to accusing me of not knowing.

>>40517192
We fling shit here, sir

>>40517212
>You can only like chocolate ice cream, or orange sherbet. If you like chocolate, you hate orange sherbet - and vice versa.
Correct. It is not, however, a false dichotomy to say:
>Orthodox Christianity calls upon the believer to have an exclusivity of belief. Therefore, you cannot believe in any other God but Jesus Christ and be an Orthodox Christian.
This should be pretty apparent.

>Neither. I reject your pairing and your myopia.
Then why are you even here? You do understand that rejecting axioms doesn't mean you've won anything, right?
>I disagree this was needed, or useful. That is the point of my post.
Cool? Do you actually know why this post was made? You aren't exactly in a position to determine what is needed or useful. You have been presented with some options, it is on you how you engage with them. Loudly rejecting engagement isn't constructive, it's the equivalent of interrupting someone else's conversation.

>No they arent. Much of the New Testament itself is in line with Neoplatonism.
"Of. Themselves."
In line with is not the same as "the same as". Further, this is a claim that requires substantiation.

>And what a egotistic, bullshit edit to change the truth that YOU dont know what a false dichotomy is, to accusing me of not knowing.
How dare people correct typos that do not accurately represent their intended message lol
It doesn't do much for your credibility to start screeching "fallacy" and then start spewing ad hominem.

>>40517192
You should look further into Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy has always had an panentheist perspective. You might be interested in particular in Bulgakov and the idea of Sophia. Bulgakov advocates for creation ex theo rather than strictly ex nihilo.

>>40517265
>It is not, however, a false dichotomy to say:
You didnt say that tautology, nor did I complain about it. You gave a choice, and that choice is a false one.
>Then why are you even here?
to discuss. "Discuss" doesnt mean everyone just agrees with you and fawns over how clever you thihink you are.
I dont agree with your post, with your understandings, and with your choice.
I have told you why.
>Do you actually know why this post was made?
Yes. Better than you, apparently.
>Loudly rejecting engagement
I never rejected engagement. I rejected your choice, and your descriptions.
You are now seething that someone DARED to not immediately agree with you.
Deal with it.
>this is a claim that requires substantiation.
There are many places you can go and read about how neoplatonism influenced early christian thought. It sounds like you dont really know what you are talking about, and havent done any research.
>How dare people correct typos that do not accurately represent their intended message lol
But it wasnt a typo. YOU are the one who does not understand the concept of a false dichotomy.
As I and other anon had to point it out to you.
And it still makes you upset.
>ad hominem.
Havent done that either. Now you just sound stupid.
And your desperate attempts to save your ego only means we are getting further and further away from what you thought you were going to talk about.
But you are allowed to derail your shitty thread as much as you want.

>>40517279
Certainly have heard this but I was under the impression that this was still debatable. It's also not the only thing I'm wrestling with regarding Christianity, anyhow. I will definitely read what Bulgakov says, though.

there is no "more likely". there is truth and there is nontruth.
there is no "you have two choices". yids and glowniggers try to spin it that way and npcs may believe it.

orthodox christianity is the rudimentary- basic bitch tutorial. (without value judgment, it is factum)
if you cant even into that, mind you, for whatever reason there might be, then you are not worthy of anything higher, elevating, loftier and noble.
zoomers, i believe call that "skill issue" but im not sure.
anyhow since i stopped reading at the 2nd sentence, op better cease yapping(posting trash) and start the tutorial
no bump for ai threads

Look.. I don't believe in anything invented by man. I believe in the truth revealed to me personally and my heart. Whatever comes from there is divine revelation of some sorts. Lhp. Rhp. Who cares. Only trust the absolute truth and if someone puts something between you and this absolute truth you see that they're bullshitting you if you look closely. God is real. Never tell a lie. Meditate until you achieve samadhi. Pray fervently every day. Renounce worldly enjoyment and rest in god. This is the truth. But, I don't know yet if Hinduism is true or not, or if something different, like a primordial true religion that isn't found today, is true. I will find out.

>>40517003 (OP)
you have a false conception of these terms. what definition of right hand path and left hand path are you using? do you even know what the path is? speak not of what you know nothing

or read the lengthy passage starting here, gain the knowledge you require to have your own thread, and begin:
>https://archive.org/details/dave-evans-the-history-of-british-magic-after-crowley-_-kenneth-grant-amado-crow/page/n89/mode/1up?view=theater

>>40517192
>I am not a lestes

>>40519853
So LHP. People get so mad at labels and then just describe themselves as the label exactly.
Like teenage girls trying to be special.

>>40517192
Vedanta is RHP. Hindu LHP involves meat, fish, booze, parched grain and sexual rites

>>40517192
All RHP is non-dual. Even Christian RHP. All LHP is non-dual as well. The question is how do you get there? By observing your culture's mores? Or by transgressing them?
(Crowley's definition of the RHP/LHP is different, read Magick Without Tears for that one, it's a bit abstract)

>>40517003 (OP)
Advaita and Neoplatonism are "LHP"? Lol never mind false dichotomies, what arbitrary shit is this? Just come right out and say Christianity is better than everything else instead of presenting this Pascal's wager for retards.