Council of Nicaea Edition!

Christian Esotericism is the inner and/or mystical aspect of the Christian Religion, it includes:
>Christian Gnosis (Clement of Alexandria)
>Desert Fathers Spirituality (Evagrius Ponticus)
>Catholic Contemplative Tradition (Bonaventure)
>Hesychasm (Gregory Palamas)
>Chivalry (Wolfram von Eschenbach)
>Christian Alchemy (George Ripley)
>Rhineland Mysticism (Meister Eckhart)
>Christian Cabala (Johannes Reuchlin)
>Paracelsianism (Paracelsus)
>Rosicrucianism (Robert Fludd)
>Christian theosophy (Jakob Böhme)
>Martinism (Louise Claude de Saint-Martin)
>Swedenborgianism (Swedenborg)
>Magical Idealism (Novalis)
>Romanticism (Baader)
>Anthroposophy (Rudolf Steiner)
>Sophiology (Sergei Bulgakov)
>Christian Hermeticism (Valentin Tomberg)
>Fourth Way (Boris Mouravieff)
>Christian Traditionalism (Jean Borella)
>Divine Love (James Padgett)
And much more, so let's continue to talk about it!

>Resources (WIP)
https://www.john-uebersax.com/plato/cp.htm
https://jacobboehmeonline.com/
https://archive.org/details/awakening-to-divine-wisdom-christian-initiation-into-three-worl-nodrm_202202/mode/1up
https://janelead.org/resources.html
https://archive.org/details/bookofcontemplat00unde/
https://archive.org/details/rudolf-steiner-book-collection/
https://swedenborg.com/bookstore/free-ebooks-downloads/
https://www.gornahoor.net/?page_id=47
https://archive.org/details/meditations-on-the-tarot/
https://files.catbox.moe/8n4061.djvu (Meditations on the Tarot)
https://eliasartista.substack.com/
https://passtheword.org
https://catenabible.com/mt/1

>>40881984 (OP)
Previous thread >>40824636

is lucifer and satan distinct in terms of demonology considering that lucifer is amoral (i.e. not applying to the moral schema) and also that satan is evil (in the sense that he wants to side with the 'evil' side of the good-and-evil/black-and-white moral schema)

https://counter-currents.com/2025/07/the-origins-of-christian-zionism/

>>40881897
>first you must provide a syllogistic demonstration of the principle of non-contradiction, one that does not beg the question
I would argue that this is impossible specifically BECAUSE the system for understanding the soul incorporates our own contradictions.

We know that it is good to pursue Justice and balance equations of fairness in that way, and yet we ALSO know that it is good to have Charity, and intentionally UNbalance equations for the sake of moving in a positive direction.

This is an inherent contradiction of our nature that is resolved by the "emulsifier" of "Harmony" as laid out by the kabbalah.

>>40882085
No contradiction between justice and mercy. Or else present it. But it seems that way if you live in a flesh coffin

>>40882003
The idea of Satan and "being satanic" comes down to the simple concept of an "adversary" (or even a predator, if you like).
This stands in contrast to the core of Jesus's way vis a vis "Universal Human Brotherhood".

And that's all there is to it.
If you are an enemy to your fellow humans, you are satanic, so be a friend.

>>40882095
>Or else present it.
I just did, but I can explain it a number of ways.

>No contradiction between justice and mercy.
Bruh, they are literally mutually exclusive.

Think about it: If you gave somebody *something they earned* and then called it "charity", that would be nothing but an insult to that person.
It literally *cannot be charity* unless its MORE than what the recipient deserves.

This is why there's an important link between Charity and HOPE.
Because unlike Justice, where you've giving people exactly what they deserve (which is good, but promotes stagnation), with Charity you are HOPING that it does some good even tho you might be helping somebody apparently unworthy.

>>40881965
>Wallahi they all (besides Proclus) shared a Christian worldview dependant on Scripture and Philosophy, and they read each other and the ones before them, saw themselves as continuing what was before them and later authors synthesized the ones before themselves into their thought
This is historically romantic but evasive. Reading someone doesn't imply agreement. Doesn't remove metaphysical conflict.

Just because Christian authors inherited concepts from Neoplatonism doesn’t mean they remained Neoplatonic. That’s like saying Aquinas is Aristotelian because he uses Aristotle, despite radically Christianizing his metaphysics.

>The Logoi are the Henads of Proclus which are always the Platonic Forms, and Eriugena identifies them with efficient causes, so your Logoi is your cause, later Berthold of Moosburg in his commentary on Proclus identifies these causes with the Eckhartian Grund and the Gemüt of his followers
This is a category error layered on top of a historical game of telephone.

Maximus’s Logoi are not Proclean Henads. They're personal, Christological, and teleological. They are the multiple expressions of the Logos, incarnate in Christ. They're divine ideas instantiated in creation, ordered toward deification. Henads, on the other hand, are impersonal, pre-hypostatic, pre-cosmic One-many unities.

Eriugena isn't the gold standard. He's speculative and heterodox even by medieval standards, bordering on pantheism. Quoting him doesn’t vindicate anything unless you first prove his framework is valid within Christian theology.

Berthold’s commentary isn't metaphysical authority. That he tries to reconcile Eckhart with Proclus is interesting, but it’s no proof that such a reconciliation is possible or coherent. Your method is to throw out historical names who read each other and pretend that makes an argument.

>>40882115
If you are giving them more (or better) than they deserve, then that includes what they deserve. It satisfies justice and then goes further still. Or was there no point in the Crucifixion?
Now an excess of mercy is contrary to justice, but still this is to say it improperly, since anything in excess is no virtue.

>>40881965
>He was read in the West and his teaching on the distinction between the Essence of something and its Energies reappears in Eriugena.
This is grossly misleading. The Essence–Energy distinction is Palamite and was fully formulated only in the 14th century by Gregory Palamas, not simply Gregory of Nyssa. Palamas’s distinction is anti-Latin in its theological orientation, defending the real distinction between God’s unknowable essence and His knowable energies. It's a move explicitly rejected in much of Western scholasticism.

Eriugena is not Palamite metaphysics. Eriugena’s distinction between nature that creates and nature that is created is not identical to the Palamite essence/energies. Eriugena’s entire framework is speculative, infused with Neoplatonic ideas, and not considered orthodox by either East or West.

>Just so you know, all of Philosophy just happens to be later Philosophers attempts at reconciling Plato with Aristotle
This is an oversimplified meme, not an argument. Scotus rejects Aristotelian necessity and Platonic participation. Aquinas modifies Aristotle by Christian revelation. Duns Scotus and Ockham radically reshape metaphysical assumptions away from the ancient paradigm. This cliché only functions if you flatten philosophy into aesthetic genealogies.

>It sounds like you just consider Neoplatonism to be specifically Late Antique Pagan Platonism, Plotinus and Iamblichus, whereas for me Neoplatonism is also the continuation of the tradition in Christianity, Judaism and Islam, so for me Augustine, Boethius, Eriugena, the Victorines, the Chartrians and the Franciscans are all Neoplatonists because they continue those traditions
If we're calling someone like Scotus, who rejects participation metaphysics, emanation, and impersonal ontological hierarchies, a "Neoplatonist," then the word has lost all meaning.

>>40882206
>Aquinas modifies Aristotle by Christian revelation.
On whether the world had a beginning.
He follows St. John Damascene on the essence/energies distinction btw.
Be specific or shut up

>>40882200
>If you are giving them more (or better) than they deserve, then that includes what they deserve. It satisfies justice and then goes further still.
Holy shit bro, that's a VERY dumb take.

So if I have an evil person who DESERVES NOTHING, am I now "satisfying justice and then some" by helping him?

Stop and (actually) think: "Justice" and "Injustice" have nothing to do with whether the equation is imbalanced in a positive or negative direction.
ONLY that its imbalanced.

Thus, Charity IS injustice. That's the entire point of it. You're giving somebody "better than justice".

>>40882223
>So if I have an evil person who DESERVES NOTHING, am I now "satisfying justice and then some" by helping him?
Obviously yes. Do you think that helping someone always means giving them what they want? It means, at the very least, giving them their due.

>>40882228
>no counter-argument
>Just "nuh uh" and a nonsequitur
Yeah, hit me back when you can actually carry on the conversation bro, this is sad.

I understand that I'm taking apart your shabby dogma over here, but you could at least have the courage to process what's being said.

>>40882233
Good, go away. I have already seen what you're trying to do.

>>40882243
>Good, go away.
No, its obvious I have more to say here than you, given that you can't even make an argument.

Feel free to fuck off when you're done being an embarrassment to Jesus tho.
I'm sure he appreciates having a retard as his hype-man.

>>40882253
>I'm sure he appreciates having a retard as his hype-man.
He loves us retards, ackshully.
Thank you for saying
>Charity IS injustice
out loud

That's all I was looking for

>>40882264
>Thank you for saying
>>Charity IS injustice
>out loud
>That's all I was looking for
Yes bro, I'm fully aware that you are satisfying YOURSELF (in your filthy arrogance) that you are correct.

Sadly, you have nothing resembling logic that applies in reality.

Justice and Charity are COMPLETELY mutually exclusive.
Charity is ALWAYS giving somebody "Better than they deserve", and you are sitting here CONGRADULATING YOURSELF on making an argument that "Nah, Justice means something OTHER THAN 'what you deserve'".

You're a sanctimonious clown, and I am the one aligned to Jesus here because I'm telling you the TRUTH, sinner.

>>40882274
Hard to believe you guys get paid for this intentional slop

What christian esotericism will help me psyop myself into ignoring the jewishness of christianity

>>40882188
>Reading someone doesn't imply agreement. Doesn't remove metaphysical conflict.
Most of the time they intent is to be faithful and not contradict the truth they found in who they read
>Just because Christian authors inherited concepts from Neoplatonism doesn’t mean they remained Neoplatonic
We are arguing over words, for me when you are dependant on Neoplatonism you are continuing that tradition, Christian or otherwise
>They're divine ideas instantiated in creation, ordered toward deification
So they're henads...
I know why you are arguing with me, in reality we agree with eachother, we both believe in the superiority of Christian Theology over Pagan Philosophy and for that you want to argue Theology's special nature in opposition to Philosophy, I just have a different view of things, I don't find dependance and direct continuation of Platonic traditions as shameful, instead I am quite the fan of it, just like how we continue Ancient Judaism, we also continue Ancient Philosophy, but are distinct from both
>Eriugena isn't the gold standard. He's speculative and heterodox even by medieval standards, bordering on pantheism.
Or maybe he's one of the greatest Christian thinkers of all time?
Again, If you want to debate, choose a specific topic and we can go in-depth
>That he tries to reconcile Eckhart with Proclus is interesting, but it’s no proof that such a reconciliation is possible or coherent.
He did it though
>Your method is to throw out historical names who read each other and pretend that makes an argument.
Maybe i just think that tradition and authentic continuation is important and that it's important to see their view of things?

>>40882769
>>40882206
Ok Jay Dyer just so you know Nyssa was translated into Latin and read in the West and he has certain ideas related to Essences and their Energies that was adopted, and because Palamas didn't like Barlaam from Southern Italy's critique of the Hesychasts that doesn't mean that he goes against every single Latin Medieval theologian
>Eriugena’s distinction between nature that creates and nature that is created is not identical to the Palamite essence/energies.
Wrong, this is not the teaching of Essences and Energies in Eriugena, Eriugena uses the same system of applying the Aristotelian Categories to God's Energies, and speaks of the Unknowable Essence of God and the Unknowable Essence of Man
>Scotus/Ockham talk
Yes they developed different systems, but that doesn't change the fact that during most of history, even after those two in Europe, we worked with a combined Platonic-Aristotelian framework, I know you don't like my lists but i can list them if you want to

>>40882481
The letters by Paul.

>>40882769
>>40882773
Curious to ask what denomination church you attend weekly; do you believe the Eucharist could simply be food and communion, feeding the hungry and sharing a table with sinners as we evangelize?

I just think it being limited to a non appetizing unleavened bread seems unlikely to be what Jesus wants the Eucharist to solely be given his insistence for us to feed his sheep physically and spiritually.

>>40882794
Catholic, and I believe the Eucharist to be the actual flesh and blood of Christ

>>40882864
That’s cool and all but Corinthians speaks of Paul rebuking recent converts for hogging all the food in the original communal Eucharist; later as crowds grew throughout centuries it laid the way to a more organized Eucharist on an altar (single file line) to account for limited resources/food

>>40882085

Justice and Mercy are identical and cosubstantial in their absolutes. God is Merciful because Justice would demand that all humanity be turned into dust for our sins. Yet, God does not forgive unconditionally. We must ASK for forgiveness. Justice is done upon those who commit evil and are unrepentant.

Our world is profoundly unbalanced today because we have made a distinction between Justice and Mercy, and have preferred one over the other (Mercy).

>>40882916
Yes today we have a more ritualized version, it was a much more "authentic" meal, there's a Religion For Breakfast video you can watch about it, -but- the video claims that the Eucharist is derived from Roman traditions, but that's only partly true, at Qumran we have discovered a text that mentions the future coming Messiah breaking bread in a communal meal with the elders of the faith, so it has a Jewish origin
>>40882481
Do you like Phoenicians?

>>40882970
Yeah it sort of pisses me off that Catholics never talk about that bit. The Eucharist should be able to feed the hungry; it should be en evenly distributed breakfast or dinner. (Most masses are in morning or evening)

I can’t tell you how many times I go to church and everyone’s hungry because they skipped breakfast to get to church on time and nobody’s paying attention.

Cyprian of Carthage and other sources suggest that in some places, daily celebrations began to emerge, especially in urban centers with larger Christian populations. The Eucharist would be held weekly and often sooner than weekly, regionally speaking, in the early church. Of course then we have the medieval famines which probably dissuaded the ritual far until today.

Anyways what do you think about the ecclesiastical papal priesthood over Rome often interpreted as the whore who rides on the beast , drunk on the blood of saints (Jews and Protestants in crusades in religious wars) See: multiple popes convening military power through state alliances such as the Franks in order to take back Jerusalem (in which lots of Jews were slaughtered in the barely accidental crossfire of it all ) I could go on but you get the point I hope. I’m looking to join an Orthodox Church in the west

>>40883048
To add on; the churches I’ve gone to would host a free meal after mass anyways so why not consolidate the two and follow the ancient church practice? I can’t find it any reasoning against besides the argument people would get distracted: but that could be curbed if the priest held the hymns and the reading before eating; or a variation of that.

>>40883048
>>40883148
People don't like change, and honestly if someone tried that it would then turn into another new denomination

>>40883231
Fair enough. What’s your take on it?

>>40883259
It would be good, but honestly if the Eucharist turned into a free meal, then it would get criticized by people for being a form of propaganda to turn the homeless and poor into Christians

>>40883280
That would be true; but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be attempted. Imagine if Jesus gave in to the Pharisees criticism all the time.

>>40883298
I wouldn't mind seeing that as well, but an actual Church would need to try that

>>40882929
>God is Merciful because Justice would demand that all humanity be turned into dust for our sins.
Saying shit like this about the entire universe is how you can know you've gotten off track...

Justice and Mercy are perfectly contradictory, and true, transcendent GOODNESS (aka "what is best") is achieved when they are harmoniously neutralized aka balanced.

And reminder: My answer here may be better than yours, but it is ALWAYS hubris to believe one has arrived at "The True Answer".
Refinement is infinite.

>>40882371
>He thinks there are paid shills here
Well the only ones with incentive would be Christian churches, so... yeah... take your meds, schizo.

>>40883385
All men have fallen short of the glory of god. The punishment of sin, is death. He’s right. When Jesus was referred to as good teacher he rebuked his earned compliment; insisting that only Father God is good. Please study your scripture more before entering theological debates, especially when walking into philosophical territory.

>>40883417
I am not having a theological debate.
The scripture is flawed, and Jesus himself went outside of the scripture of his time to teach about goodness in the best way it could be framed for ancient-world bumkins.

Smarter people today need less poetic framing. They don't need to be taught that goodness is "the goodly king" who's gonna "reward you for doing the good things".
People can just ACTUALLY directly engage with the concept that, "there is nothing morally higher than serving the greatest good".

And that difference MATTERS because we need to leverage those human brains to refine our concept of good and how they can be realized in the material.
Getting the people who focus on virtue vs progress back on the same page would be a revival for humanity.

But then, this thread seems more focused on putting "Christian branding" on everything...

>>40883453
>The scripture is flawed
My friend scripture is divinely inspired
>But then, this thread seems more focused on putting "Christian branding" on everything...
Maybe because this is a Christian thread?

>>40883453
I don’t think you are Christian at all, I’m not the anon you’ve been constantly arguing with but I ask you to cease replying to me. Peace be with you in your life.

Chapter 34 and 35 of the cloud of unknowing are worth slogging through the first 33 chapters.

>>40883553
Why is that

Is mother Mary descendant of both David and Aaron? How would Jesus fit the Aaron ancestory?

>>40883505
>My friend scripture is divinely inspired
As is every idea with power.
Doesn't make it complete; doesn't make it refined; doesn't mean it was even cleanly transmitted through the first hand that wrote it.

>Maybe because this is a Christian thread?
Forgive me for hoping that Christians might be capable of more than a branding blitz.

>>40883531
>I don’t think you are Christian at all
I am somebody who seeks proper execution of what Jesus envisioned.

Whether that makes me "Christian" always seems to depend on whichever answer will make me an enemy to the boor who's asking...

>>40883560
It feels like the author stretched single sentence philosophical prepositions to a page and a half long chapters.
The purpose is to lay down a cosmology of sorts for how interractions with God work.
34 and 35 are somewhat of an intermediary step between the prior chapters and what seems (I'm on chapter 38) to be what the reader specifically should do to actually reach God.
Explaining in a verbose way the system felt extremely useless and meaningless, because those are just axioms linked by logical steps. But extending as much as possible the explanation of the "practice" actually feels reasonable.

>>40883607
>As is every idea with power.
The idea of sin is pretty powerful but God doesn't inspire anyone to sin
>Doesn't make it complete;
It does
>doesn't make it refined;
It does
>doesn't mean it was even cleanly transmitted through the first hand that wrote it.
It does
>I am somebody who seeks proper execution of what Jesus envisioned.
And you gain knowledge of that from scripture you say "doesn't mean it was even cleanly transmitted through the first hand that wrote it."

>>40883677
>The purpose is to lay down
The purpose of the first 33 chapters is to lay down*

>>40883607
I don’t quite understand why you surround “goodly king” and “rewarding for your deeds” in quotation marks. Yes; solely relying on treasures in heaven for good deeds doesn’t seem the most ideal way to inspire goodness but it is backed by Jesus’ own words that your faith and evangelization will store up treasures in heaven (the passion gospel, loving your neighbor in testimony of Christ Jesus’ own passion)

Your take on Jesus lacks the Grace that comes with faith.

>>40882864
>>40882794
I'm Catholic but in my opinion
1. it's enough to witness the miracle of the Eucharist (no need to consume it)
2. living in the presence of the Lord (e.g. remember Jesus and his sacrifice every time you eat bread and drink) is probably the essential aspect
of course you can combine them into one act...

>>40882481
>What christian esotericism will help me psyop myself into ignoring the jewishness of christianity
none, you just need to observe that Christians are the real Jews
that being said, it's better to be nice while you get your bearings... don't forget what Jesus said about pulling out the weeds... there are many Jews who are not "Jew for profit" or not a Jew because their mother told him that if you are a Jew you can hurt anyone (especially those stupid Christians)

>Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
>But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
>But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
>So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
>He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
>But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
>Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
> ~~ Matthew 13:24-30 ~~

pic rel is from a Jewish prayer book... if a Jew drank from a spring, would you choose to die of thirst?

>>40882970
I dont know any phoenicians
>>40883782
>Hebrew is the language used by God in creating the universe
Horrifying

>>40883680
>The idea of sin is pretty powerful but God doesn't inspire anyone to sin
The desires that make sin inevitable are powerful, and always contain at least some fragmentary form of good.

>It does. It Does! IT DOES!
Who are you trying to convince?

>And you gain knowledge of that from scripture
The Most-High Spirit of Goodness itself did not entrust its law to human priests and paper. The only place it WOULD exist in a pure form is imprinted onto our souls themselves.

That's where Jesus learned it from, not "muh speshul holy nepotism", and its how even children can detect the moral flaws of the scriptures.

>>40883717
>I don’t quite understand why you surround “goodly king” and “rewarding for your deeds” in quotation marks.
Because its a wrong understanding of what's happening, yet would have been necessary to explain all this to desert bumkins.

If there is a "will" behind the universe, it is what set the wheel spinning.
The "everyday goodness" that we see in the world of people being returned the fruits of their works, that's just the wheel spinning.
Its not like the big boss is smiling down on you for whatever good deed; the whole thing is a good-producing machine.

>>40884453
Yeah but sin itself?
>Who are you trying to convince?
Just stating facts
>That's where Jesus learned it from
What's Jesus to you?

>>40884558
>Yeah but sin itself?
What power does sin have if stripped of its benefits?
>"Come sin, kids! You can be wrong and suffer for no reason!"
That's a repellant idea.

Sin NEEDS to piggy-back on something good or it has no power.
I believe Christians express a similar idea with, "his is the power"?
Or to state it more plainly: Goodness is the ONLY power. Y'know... cuz evil doesn't create...?

>What's Jesus to you?
The exemplar of The Hanged Man, i.e. the principle of the higher existing in service to the lower and accomplishing greatness in this through the power of sacrifice.

>>40884613
Augustine also talks about sin for the sake of it
>The exemplar of The Hanged Man, i.e. the principle of the higher existing in service to the lower and accomplishing greatness in this through the power of sacrifice.
A bit evasive, is he God?

>>40884625
>A bit evasive, is he God?
I don't see why he would be. Is that enough to flip a switch and make me your adversary? (for the record, that sort of thing would be why its bad to turn goodness into a flag)

>sin for the sake of it
I would suggest that even the "wanna watch the world burn" sort of nihilism is driven by the corruption of a foundational type of good.

Specifically, the goodness to SEE GOOD. To have the vision of what SHOULD be.
That is the vision of the light-bringer, and when the world drags it down, it becomes Luciferian nihilism.

>>40884670
No but it does confirm suspicions and explains why you don't want the Bible to be divinely inspired

>>40884675
>explains why you don't want the Bible to be divinely inspired
What I want has nothing to do with it. I'm OBSERVING that the bible is not divinely inspired because it was compiled by humans, contains flaws, calls for acts that are HIGHLY sinful outside of very specific contexts, and there's a million different versions (which, side note, if you're gonna claim divine inspiration, I'm gonna need you to specify a version).

Meanwhile, everything we need to know about goodness is actually already woven into reality itself, because of-fucking-course it is. How else would this work?

>>40884690
>million different versions
Are you muslim, were you muslim or do you come from a muslim background?

>>40884690
Jesus said you can ask the “system” anything in faith and it’ll give it to you. This system also ordained Jesus as its heir and now king, savior of your sins, if only you confess. Jesus is he who fulfilled the several hundred prophecies the Jews were waiting for; mathematically impossible if mere confidences. https://www.bartehrman.com/how-many-prophecies-did-jesus-fulfill/

>>40884699
Absolutely not, although I can imagine they like to hit on that point a bit.

>>40884772
>This system also ordained Jesus as its heir and now king, savior of your sins, if only you confess.
Or to put it in other words:
>This system also ordained Jesus as its heir
>heir
Yes, his teachings were a logical next step after the brutality of OT law.
>and now king
And yes, the path to virtue will always broadly follow the ways he laid out.
>savior of your sins
Because the only way to escape the endless cycle of human strife and vengeance is to enter into Universal Human Brotherhood with your fellow humans.
>if only you confess.
And an absolutely necessary step for entering into the human fraternity is the forgiveness of sins (your own and those of others).

ALL OF THAT is inherent to the systems of the world itself. Its always been there. Its just the next level of the same reconciliation and brotherhood that allowed single cells to become organisms.

>>40884839
>Absolutely not
Then you have no excuse to be uneducated
What are these millions of versions? Name me some please

>>40884839
What do you think of the second resurrection and the book of life reading to purge those not in it? Your metaphorical interpretation denies Jesus of any miraculous power to heal, resurrect, and damn you to the purifying fire that’s hell; which btw; I believe to be temporal but practically forever in how it feels to those in it
the word forever was also used metaphorically in Greek antiquity to suggest eons (10,000 years)

>>40884425
>Horrifying
considering that the writing system itself is more or less direct descendant of the first alphabet (quite ironically phoenician... no, I'm not that other anon), probably everything is horrifying... which is probably correct considering that fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom

I exposed the glownigger for you all. Why do you continue to engage?
>>40883677
The book is pure practice, but be careful who you discuss it with. The author is not kidding around in Chapter 1

Jesus is Michael Jordan. Yes, he's better at this than you and I, but everyone is playing the exact same game.

By the way, if you really don't believe that there are paid shills and pro bono satanists itt then you are kidding yourself, the topic alone virtually magnetizes them. Get protection

ANTMA

>>40884875
>What are these millions of versions? Name me some please
King James Version (KJV), New International Version (NIV), New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), English Standard Version (ESV), New Living Translation (NLT), Christian Standard Bible (CSB), New American Standard Bible (NASB), Revised Standard Version (RSV), The Message (MSG), Good News Translation (GNT), New Century Version (NCV), Contemporary English Version (CEV), New King James Version (NKJV), Amplified Bible (AMP), Douay-Rheims Bible (DRB), New English Translation (NET), Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB), Young’s Literal Translation (YLT), Geneva Bible (GNV), Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)

Y'know, you could have just skipped this step and made your point...
Do all the different versions "not count" for some reason?

>>40884890
>Your metaphorical interpretation denies Jesus of any miraculous power to heal, resurrect, and damn you to the purifying fire that’s hell
I would say "does not require" rather than "denies".

For example, without Jesus having any special status in the universe, we might easily imagine miracles enabled by goodly spirits who aligned to the positivity of what he was doing.

As for the "end of the world", that's been happening constantly all along, in a sense.
The state of the world grows more subtle or more coarse all the time, and its ALWAYS "the end of the world", whether that means the world as gotten better and old men weep for their endangered hardships, or things fall apart and the world becomes more like hell again.

>>40885661
>For example, without Jesus having any special status in the universe, we might easily imagine miracles enabled by goodly spirits who aligned to the positivity of what he was doing.
Yes and no. The problem is we have basically lost the Platonic understanding of the Unseen World. The thing you are talking about, were we to better convey what you intend to mean in ways acceptable to others, would be to say
>All drink of One Spirit,
Where what you mean by "aligned to the positivity of" would be understood as "ontologically an expression of the One's Goodness, rather than Separate or Opposed to One."

Nobody thinks about the Holy Spirit too hard nowadays, but if you just read Paul without skipping words or relying on Church Tradition to explain them away, a lot of borderline "heretical" stuff just jumps out at you.

>>40885741
>tfw Herbert was right about religion
>but Tolkien was right about divinity

>>40885661
That’s only for inferior English language, you only have the Vulgate and the Septuagint as authorative versions with tradition.

>>40885661
What language was the Bible written in?

>>40881984 (OP)
>Swedenborg
Denied that atonement was for the sins of mankind. Cribbed from Neoplatonism; has a cosmology similar to Ismaili Islam (see: Henry Corbin, Swedenborg and Esoteric Islam).
>Steiner
Denied that Jesus was God in the flesh and that the cosmic logos had, at some stage, entered into the man Jesus; claimed that there were two children called Jesus; denied the atonement for sin.
>Bulgakov
Includes the "Sophia" in the Godhead. Something not seen in any of the revelation of God to man except in the Gnostic and Gnostic adjacent movements.
>Tomberg
A student of Steiner and eventually broke with him - infected with Blavatsky and Steiner's nonsense/perversion of Christianity.
>Rosicrucianism
"Lazarus is legit like immortal... fr bro!!" -> later movements are all "oh it's all just allegory" and Mason tier posturing.
>Christian Cabala
>Christian
>Kabbalah
Using a system created by Jews in response to their temple being destroyed, going away from the hard literalism of yester year into "Oh it's all just Neoplatonism really," to explain Christianity. Braindead.

Laughable that you people keep promoting the deceived.

>>40886807
>Swedenborg
>Steiner
>Tomberg
Yeah not much of a fan of them myself
>Bulgakov
No that has nothing to do with Gnosticism, Sophiology develops out of Old Testament Wisdom Tradition and the identification of Christ with God's Wisdom
>>Rosicrucianism
Not interested in anything Rosicrucian post 1800, but the original texts and the German Gold und Rosenkreuzer are a form of Paracelsian Protestant Esotericism
>Cabala
No Christian Cabala is not Jewish, it only uses some Kabbalistic Primary texts like Christians have always used Pagan texts, in reality it's dependant on the Christian tradition of Dionysius the Areopagite and Nicholas of Cusa, read Cusa and then read the "Bible of Cabala" by Johannes Reuchlin and you'll see that yourself

>>40886311
Nah, after I went to the trouble of getting that list from AI for you, I'm gonna need you to actually just make your point before I play along more.

>>40886179
>Literally trying to tell me that the ultimate secrets of the universe are gatekept behind a language barrier
My brother in Christ ew... brother EW...

>>40886807
You planning to purity-spiral your way to heaven?

>>40881984 (OP)
Videos on Gnosis, its various types (SPG, UPG & VPG) and Gnosticism:

https://youtu.be/0F7knBtLsNs
https://youtu.be/260L-DEZVQ0
https://youtu.be/diHf_Tup6tE

>>40887207
>Nah, after I went to the trouble of getting that list from AI for you, I'm gonna need you to actually just make your point before I play along more.
Are you scared of being outed as an idiot or something?

>>40887260
>Are you scared of being outed as an idiot or something?
Bruh, shouldn't you try to be honest when you're repping for Jesus?

I said the bible had a million versions, you called me a muslim and asked me to list some, I did, and now you're playing keep-away with a point that you only claim to have.

Shit or get off the pot.

>>40887335
Please answer what language(s) the Bible was written in

>>40887364
It is the most translated text in history, and does not have an "original version" written in a single language.
And that does nothing but support my earlier point, you idiot...

Because again, the most-high spirit of goodness itself is not going to entrust all-important spiritual information to LANGAUGE.
That shit is imprinted ONTO US.

>>40881984 (OP)
>Rudolf Steiner
Seems like he knew a lot.

>>40887379
You tell me about the most high spirit of goodness, but when asked the most basic question concerning the largest religion on earth you are unable to give a real answer...

>>40887433
>unable to give a real answer
I have given you multiple, and you are a liar and a coward who won't even state his point.

Jesus weeps that such garbage represents him on Earth.

>>40887448
>Jesus weeps that such garbage represents him on Earth.
Sounds like you're getting embarrassed for being unable to answer

low level trolling be like

>>40887546
Reminder that the glownigger jumped in when I called out the Dyerfag for imposing "systematic theology" on an antithetical domain

>>40887617
Further reminder that Christendom College is one of several Catholic universities specifically founded for the purpose of feeding certain intelligence agencies, a rare distinction among a multitude that only came to adopt that role later in their history. Reminder that analogs to this exist in every denomination but notably the Greek and Russian Orthodox churches

>>40887617
>imposing "systematic theology" on an antithetical domain
What's the antithetical domain? Cuz systematic theology seems kinda legit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEV65PXoTOM

i like this NDE
its nice af.

prasie god.

>>40889280
Awareness of what is

>>40889994
Seems to me that's exactly what would *lead one* to systematic theology..

After all... (and this is a controversial take for some reason) ...the world itself has gotten better over time.

>>40890008
Esse quam videtur

>>40890022
No, bumkin, it does not just "seem" better.

Fewer people suffer senseless deaths, torture, or other horrors that scar their souls and drive them into darkness, and that INCREASED PEACE has given many more humans the time and mental coherence to pursue the betterment of our species and/or their souls.

That is all 100% capital-G GOOD on all three planes, and all the backwards bumkins can do is bitch and wish darkness on us all.

>>40890022
>>40890727
Oh, and protip: The current problems of things like "directionlessness" or chaotic social mutations are *better problems* than the brutal, deadly shit we'd been dealing with until now.

Humans are kinder, better people than they were, and that includes the people who ostensibly OPPOSE that change (as they would all be considered hopelessly soft by their own honored forebears).

Anyway, /rant

>>40890727
>>40890754
>>40890754
This stuff about human progress is a total non sequitur. You missed the import of the aphorism, and you glow.

>>40891410
>Human progress is a non sequitur
>Something something you glow because I can't engage with what you're saying
Yeah, again, you are a literal fucking disgrace to Jesus, and he deserves better than you.

You can't respond to ANYTHING I'm saying? Not even a propaganda line?
Just, "Oh, HUMAN PROGRESS isn't related to any of this", what?

Its time to stop posting.

It is the Lord's business to judge this body and to tell me who I am. He deserves, and He attains, no less than Himself. If He should deem it fitting to damn my soul to suffer for all perpetuity, what is that to me? Thus was this body born and thus is it dying, forever deprived of its sovereign good. But I am taken by the force of His brilliant gaze. Can He now fail to consume me completely in the infinite furnace of His Heart without leaving even ashes? Let every creature bless the Lord!

I got done with a 9 day fast yesterday. How else can i power my spirit?

>>40893009
Nice going. Try prayer and selfless service next

>>40893036
Thank you.

There's something i gotta get of my chest.
Throughout all my years on 4chan i have encountered people who have given great distress, people who have given me PTSD when i was already struggling with PTSD my entire life.
I told a friend this, i told him i doubt they'll make it to Heaven, but he told me i should forgive and pray for them, i told him no, i already did that but their hearts are too hardened and wicked, yet he tells me to pray anyway.
I honestly do not enjoy such Christian pacifism, God wants us to forgive yes but that doesn't mean we should let the wicked get away with what they do.
The guy thinks God wants me to be a messenger, an ambassador, but i am none of those things, God wants me to be a creative, a shepard and a warrior.
My friend is fine with the first two yet he seems to be afraid of the warrior part and it feels like he's trying to drag me out of the role God wants for me for his plan and instead have the same role as he does when i tell him that that is not what God wants for me.
All in all i just don't get why certain people get upset when i say i am done praying for people who make it loud and clear that they will never free themselves from their wickedness, whenever i say that they should face judgement for their sins.
Did God tell Moses to pray for the Pharaoh?
Did God tell David to pray for Goliath?
Did God tell Elisha to pray for Jezebel?
I find it so odd that even when people acknowledge that not everyone is going to make it to Heaven they still get irked whenever i point it out.
I just no longer wanna waste energy trying to save the wicked who have already sided against God, i just wanna focus on saving those who are lost yet still have a chance to be found by the light of Jesus.

>>40893631
>Did God tell Moses to pray for the Pharaoh?
>Did God tell David to pray for Goliath?
>Did God tell Elisha to pray for Jezebel?
Did He have to?
A warrior must be at least strong enough to forgive, lest he wield his blade in anger and give himself over to the demon of wrath. Moses did not drown Pharaoh because he was angry with him but because God commanded it. Sometimes physical combat is necessary, but that does not excuse one from the spiritual combat. And bear in mind that people who are shown the sufferings of hell before they die say that they are so horrible that they lose the ability to wish them on anyone. Still, the ones who wishfully think that no one is going to hell cannot forgive either. What they are clinging to is the vain hope that it does not matter what you do in this life after all, that a good and just God would not judge every soul according to its deeds, and therefore that forgiveness was never necessary in the first place.

>>40893752
Well for starters, like i said i do forgive, i just don't want people who did me wrong, or those who do wrong in general, to get away with it or else they hurt more people and spread their wickedness.
And i never said i want people to go to hell, i just acknowledge that that's where a good chunk of the population is going, they have proved it to me, and that's the fate they themselves have chosen, and like Jesus' own prophecy from the Book of Revelatios states, most people are going to faith God's Wrath and won't make it to Heaven, it's sad but who are we to try to fight against God's plan, the plan that Jesus himself said is going to happen. I feel like God is allowing me to witness such wickedness so i won't feel so bad for those who get left behind, i know he's doing the same for others around the world as well.
And you're right about Moses, but like i said, God never told him to pray for the Pharaoh, let alone pray for him to soften his heart and turn to God. Like you said, it's God's command, and i feel like it's God command that he doesn't want us wasting our time on those who have submitted themselves to, for example, the spirit of Jezebel and instead focus on those who are actually soft of heart yet are still lost, and we should get to them before the wicked corrupts them.
All in all i am glad we are having this discussion and i agree, i just have to acknowledge when the Holy Spirit inside of me tells me what i should and shouldn't do, and from that feeling it's telling me to stop wasting time trying to save my enemies and focus on action. God gives us miracles yes but he also wants us to act on the doors he opens.
I'm not saying kill anyone, i'm just saying that God wants a better justice system when it comes to the internet.

>>40893828
I agree and it is why the pointless debates in this general are one of my pet peeves. The endless cycle of trying to win over obvious bad faith actors with your eloquence and erudition is a species of self-congratulation. Cultivate attention to the Holy Ghost first and foremost, listen to Him carefully, and He will tell you what to say, when, and to whom.

>>40893871
I agree, imagine what it's like on /v/ and /co/ where the people are more wicked. Although i never do it for self congratulation, i do it because i honestly want to help others, it's recently i realized that they don't take life itself serious and would waste their lives giving others sorrow and disrespect everyone including themselves.
If that's how they choose to live the lives God had gave them, if they reject anyone trying to help, then i have no hope in them and God is letting me know to not even bother praying for them.
But at the end of the day i just want them to apologies and acknowledge that their actions are wrong, but apparently that's too much to ask.

>>40893871
>listen to Him carefully, and He will tell you what to say, when, and to whom.
I feel like he wants me to argue with people.
Everybody's wishy-washy, and they've all fallen into this "My Truth" way of thinking.

>>40894466
How are you so sure that that message is of God and not evil spirits manipulating ya to spread more hurt and wickedness.
It's in no way scriptural as the letters from the Apostle Paul are against such things.
https://www.lacopts.org/story/practicing-christianity-passages-from-the-letters-of-saint-paul/
The Letter to Titus
Avoid stupid controversies, genealogies, dissensions and quarrels about the Law, for they are unprofitable and worthless (3:9).
No offense but it sounds like your need for arguing leads to stupid quarrels, is that assumption correct?

>>40894561
> The Ravi Shaul Tarsi disagrees >:3
oy vey guess it must be true

>>40894561
>Avoid stupid controversies, genealogies, dissensions and quarrels about the Law
What I'm moved to argue about is none of those things, but rather the more foundational principle of where our first loyalty should lie in conflicts between scripture on paper, and the intuitive law carved into our hearts.

You can CLAIM that the scripture has enjoyed millennia of divine protection to ensure its perfect transmission (in spite of there being multiple versions), but I can hardly imagine that the human soul itself wouldn't enjoy at least equal protection.

I was watching an interview with Jordan Daniel Wood yesterday and he (I think it was him, anyway) mentioned something about a bunch of Anglican nuns (in the 17th century, it might have been?) having visions that seemed to imply universalism.

I couldn't find anything through search engines, so does anybody here know who/what he was talking about?

>>40882115
>The idea of Satan and "being satanic" comes down to the simple concept of an "adversary" (or even a predator, if you like).
No it comes from the adoption of zoroastrian idea of 2 opposing forces. Larp born of another larp

>>40894312
There is good reason to pray for those who mean you harm, from Christ's command in the gospels to Our Lady of Fatima's request that her children pray for those who have no one to pray for them. If the prayer would be wasted, then the Lord will certainly apply the merits to someone who needs them.
Having said that, supposing that there are actual demons on /x/, which can hardly be doubted, then do not pray for them under any circumstances. And no, you will never get an apology.

>>40894838
Bro, you need to realize that just talking disdainfully about something isn't an argument.

There may not be an "Absolute Evil" in opposition to Absolute Good, but there ARE binaries everywhere, and a huge chunk of what we think of as "Good" derives from the neutralization of those binaries.

So yes, in a sense, becoming trapped by the idea of absolute opposing forces leads one into the satanic way of thinking.
Because the real, GOOD solutions don't come from acting as an adversary.

>>40894697
What makes ya think scripture and the law in our hearts are not the same?
What makes ya think the human soul doesn't have the same protection?

>>40894904
Well a lot of people on 4chan act like they are being controlled by evil spirits in one way or another and they fully embrace those evil spirits.
I know thinks are bad here on /x/ but as someone who's from /v/ and /co/, those boards are a nests for spawning demonic behavior, as if they are brothels for the servants of satan to gather.

>>40894964
Someone I know once observed that the digital is the psychic, which I think is a correct insight. The whole internet is connatural to evil spirits. "A world of pure imagination," you couldn't design a better playground for them.

>>40894978
I suggest watching this video because you're 100% right on that.
https://www.tiktok.com/@adiannashiba/video/7520040432181579038

>>40894945
>What makes ya think scripture and the law in our hearts are not the same?
The Old Testament, and the fact that no matter how necessary it might have been at the time, the way they treated women was NEVER morally "right" in any sense, and everybody who's being reasonable can see that. They were basically slaves and a parody of the human birthright of free will.

You can meme about feminism or something if it pleases you, but the reality is very simple: OT law wasn't "morality", it was "cheat-codes for dominating in tribal warfare". They controlled the women not because "the big boss gets angy about sluts", but to facilitated "being fruitful and multiplying".
And that matters because it means we SHOULD leave a lot of it behind or reevaluate. Context changed and the "throwback morality" has become pointless and sinful.

>>40895118
Here's the thing, what you say is not the law carved in out hearts, never was, it was the twisted law of the devil.
God carved his law into the hearts of all living creatures, all of his creations, it's the devil that sneaks into people's hearts and twists, warps, distorts and even outright block his law.
The heart, at the end of the day, is still apart of the flesh, and the heart is a liar.
People need discernment to know when the heart is acting of the flesh, of the devil or of God.
What you said about how women are treated is true, i look at how people online treat women and it disgusts me, but we have to add the devil's corruption into the equation.

>>40895366
>The heart, at the end of the day, is still apart of the flesh, and the heart is a liar.
No bro, THIS is the devil sneaking into YOUR mind to poison you against your own heart.

Listen to yourself, for christ's sake! Your "heart" is not the fucking muscle in your chest, we're talking about your SOUL, and here you are CALLING IT A LIAR, you sinful thing.

You have built your thinking on a flawed foundation that "before all else, the scriptures MUST be true", and so it has warped YOUR heart away from its natural form so that oppression can seem "natural and good" to you.

Its an abomination, and only becomes more so the farther away in time we are from the ancient chaos that made it advantageous.

>>40895406
anon, do you not see what you're doing? You're the one who called it the heart in the first place. If you meant the soul just just say it's the soul, not the heart. From the begginning you were talking about the laws carved on the heart with no mention of the soul.
You actively deceived me by using the word "heart" instead of "soul" and then got angry at me simply for following the words you gave.
You're the deceiver here anon, you lied to me just so you can accuse me of being the bad guy when all you had to do was use your words properly.
Apologies now for your bad faith and deception or if you insist on continue being dishonest and disingenuous then may God have mercy on your sour soul.

>>40894931
I'm literally being literal. Not some ooga booga philosophy
>Short answer: Yes — many scholars think Jewish ideas about a cosmic adversary, expanded demonology, angels, and end-time dualism were shaped or intensified by contact with Zoroastrian beliefs during/after the Babylonian exile and under Persian rule — but it wasn’t a simple “they borrowed Ahriman and called him Satan.” The reality is more complex and debated.

>Why historians say “yes (but with caveats)”

>Chronology and contact: the key changes in Jewish thought (stronger angelology/demonology, clearer cosmic good-vs-evil expectations, resurrection/eschatology motifs) appear or intensify in Second Temple literature (roughly 5th–1st century BCE), i.e., after the Babylonian exile and during Persian rule — the period when Jews were in close contact with Iranian/Persian culture. This makes influence plausible.

>Similar religious structures: Zoroastrianism already had a well-worked dualism (Ahura Mazda vs. Angra Mainyu/Ahriman), angelic hierarchies (Amesha Spentas) and demonic forces. Jewish texts before the exile portray “the satan” mainly as an accuser/agent of God (e.g., Job), not as an independent cosmic opponent — whereas later apocalyptic texts show a much stronger adversarial figure and a cosmic moral dualism. Scholars link that shift to Persian/Zoroastrian ideas.


So your whole devil thing is just zoroastrian adoption . And the zoroastrians came up with that coz they lost a war where they felt manyu favored the indo-aryans.

So the devil is fake. So is everything else. Not fake as in its not real but fake as in manufactured not natural. Not actual truth.

>>40882206
>reconciling plato with aristotle
>>40882864
Strange as hell. Was it a factor for your conversion or did you do it since birth and added whatever context and meaning you wanted to after?

>>40895559
Bruh... is there any meaning for "a person's heart" that doesn't either refer to the muscle in their chest, or a reference to the soul?

And if you thought I was referring to the muscle, do you think that you feel emotions with that muscle?

Like, what are you talking about dishonest? This feels trolly as hell..

>>40895591
>So your whole devil thing is just zoroastrian adoption
I think you are misunderstanding what I was saying and we don't disagree that much...

>>40882481
If you want to choose to stop worshiping the Devil like your life depends on it, you can do that anytime, otherwise we're just going to kill you man.

>>40897304
Synchronicity, guess who i was just reading about? Corbin!
But yes, Corbin and Guenon are entirely different, the only thing that unites them are their focus on Islam, their critique of Modernity, their Perrenialism, oh and they're both French
To use equivalent Christian terms, Guenon focuses on Hesychasm and Palamism, Corbin focused in Jakob Böhme and the theosophers

>>40896269
anon, the heart in Biblical terms has always been used to describe the flesh and the desires of the flesh, the soul has always been a separate thing.
Here's Jeremiah 17:9-10 from the Bible itself about the deceitful nature of the heart.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah+17%3A9-10&version=ESV
This scripture has been taught down by Christian for centuries to explain how people should not always trust the desires of the heart because at the end of the day the heart is still flesh and the desires of flesh should be ignored.
You're telling me ya never knew this before?

>>40897536
>the heart iN bIbLiCaL tErMs
You are so full of shit... you sound like a fucking kingdom hearts character.

A real evangelist would have the humility to adjust his language rather than accusing people of dishonesty for not conforming to himself.

>>40897536
>This scripture has been taught down by Christian for centuries to explain how people should not always trust the desires
Oh wait, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that this was actually the root of your evil.

So this is actually THE way that Christians convince themselves that sin is good, huh?

You just pull a Pharaoh and harden your heart?
What a bunch of sinful fucking idiots...

>>40897709
anon, what you're accusing me of is exactly what that other guy is doing to me, and what i am saying is rooted in scripture. I'm not even an evangelist, i'm just trying to clear up the confusion.
>>40897717
No, no one is saying sin is good, the scripture is saying to avoid sin, to avoid the desires of the flesh.
>>40893871
>it is why the pointless debates in this general are one of my pet peeves.
>bad faith actors
Well Anon, you were right. Sorry for doubting that it was this bad here.

>>40897755
>the scripture is saying to avoid sin, to avoid the desires of the flesh.
No, your version of scripture is driving you DIRECTLY INTO sin by convincing you that your feelings have no part to play in judging what is right.

This is the most simple and sinful brainwashing imaginable.
>"Your heart tells you its wrong, but MASTER says differently so DEW EET".
This is literally among THE most popular roads to sin.

DESIRE is the element that rises from our biology, if you were curious.

>>bad faith actors
That's you, you sanctimonious asshole.