i hear calvinists often explain their concept of predestination as god’s sovereignty bc god is “so other”

but honestly the god who makes people so they glorify him by going to hell doesnt seem all that strange to me, it just sounds bad. apophatic theology seems much better suited to treating god as ‘so other’

@lizzie calvinism 👎

@lizzie it [the calvinism thing] feels utterly pointless because its so predictable

like, if youre a being with infinite time and space and power, eventually destroying things has to get boring, right?
if you make something to worship you, and it worships you, who cares? you throw a ball up in the air and it comes down. of course its gonna happen, it says nothing about the ball or you, so who cares?

My first thought is to wonder if the world that John Calvin lived in didn't care deeply with the philosophical questions about freewill. Sure it was discussed by the Romans and others previously, but maybe this just was just watered down or forgotten by the time of the reformation.

When you look at people downstream from Calvin, such as the 1600s Puritans and even modern PCA Presbyterians, they tend to not be overly evangelical. They believed in "the elect," and God would bring those to him with irresistible grace. Calvinist missionary work is still very different from the born-againers looking to get people saved.

But I don't fault the ideology in general. To believe in an absolute all-powerful god, that god would have to know the future, while also allowing the free well of creation to make that choice. There are paradoxes in all fields, including mathematics with set theory and varying sizes of infinity.

@djsumdog @azalea i mean kinda the key thing from a calvinist perspective is that grace is not resistible, so anyone who is not saved is so bc God chose not to give them that regenerating grace

yea .. and they'll also argue God gives individuals the choice, he just knows who is going to choose. It gets pretty academic after a point.

I'm more interested in reading Sapolsky's book Determined, where he apparently argues we don't have any freewill at all.

@djsumdog @azalea “god gives individuals the choice” okay so this requires either resistible grace (not reformed) or choice before grace (semi-pelagianism (aggressively not reformed))

@djsumdog @azalea like, “TULIP” isnt at all a focus on what actual presbyterians etc hold dear (and is meant as a summary of the synod of dort, which was dutch reformed), but perseverance of the saints and irresistible grace are indeed parts of reformed soteriology. there is no free will here

@azalea @djsumdog iirc presbyterians do allow a little more leeway than the continental reformed but i dont remember what that actually entails. PCUSA has a LOT of liberty on the topic but thats bc they kinda let people entirely break from the confessions (which isnt a bad thing imo, just makes it kinda not calvinist in the sense im discussing here)

barth’s interpretation is confession compatible but a bit unusual

@djsumdog @lizzie what azalea means is trying to get at something slightly different
its not really “do people have free will” as much as .. why would you create something and then call it “””evil”””? or- call it “against your will”? didn’t you make it?

this world isnt a world that could be made by an entity which actually desires to “destroy [or remove the existence of] anything ‘bad’ “. [and, its not sure that sort of entity could exist at all; it would never create something “bad” and if it truly was “all-powerful” it would have nothing to destroy]
thats what its trying to get at.

@azalea @djsumdog btw if you want an image of monergist resistible grace, look to lutheranism regeneration (through baptism) happens regardless of the state of your heart and no particular action is required for salvation (they would emphasize that we still need to be reborn every day. its not like american evangelicals would have it). its more a matter of not fighting against gods grace (resistible grace!). the reformed anathematized the lutherans for saying you could choose against god when given grace

basically: no, the reformed do not believe in free will in the conventional sene at all. it isnt a “god knows ahead what you’ll choose” thing. god chose specifically for you to choose. they do believe in something theyd call free will but its absolutely not what you were talking about from what i saw

@azalea @djsumdog https://afkimel.wordpress.com/2020/11/14/st-maximus-the-confessor-on-the-cosmic-fall/ i think about this article a lot

@azalea @djsumdog lizzie’s biased summary is that the process of creation isnt so much that there was nothing and then there was, bc even if one is to accept that God is outside of time, youre still kinda putting God in some sort of meta-time. creation instead is more of a process of the ‘real’ (God) taking on an otherwise illusory existence through the incarnation and crucifixion. through being killed by it, God kinda makes sin real but its not something that exists as all that exists is redeemed through sin’s rejection in the crucifixion

> lutheranism regeneration (through baptism)

So do they believe you can "lose your salvation?" It's no the act of Baptism itself if they need daily renewal?

You're more up to date on this than I am. I left the faith ~2002 I think. I was a born-againer / non-denominational. I never became a church member ... (never got baptized either ) but I mostly went to a PCA church every Sunday. I did some missionary work in Indian in he 90s too.I went to one PCUSA church out West in 2000. I remember they had both wine and grape juice during communion, and I talked to one of the elders for a bit after the service on the church's stance on homosexuality.

I only heard of "Reformed" a few years ago, and that from a Babylon Bee podcast. My sister's family are all evangelicals and it's interesting discussions taking place over reformed, dispensationalism .. and other theological schools of though.

@djsumdog @azalea the idea is that the baptism is sufficient, and we experience this every day by looking to our baptism. we can also reject our baptisms more explicitly

What is your view of the "progressive" church? Do you think this is a natural progression of the growing victim-as-virtue (book of Job, refined by trial, ..) aspects of Christianity that have grown over the centuries?

Also, kinda random, but I'm curious what you think about rapture theology?

@djsumdog @azalea i go to a lutheran church presently bc of my current circumstances but im an episcopalian in my heart (and intend to go to an episcopal church when i move)

lutheran and reformed were the two wings of the reformation. lutherans see luther’s interpretation of augustinian theology as a necessary correction to problems that had developed in the roman catholic church.

the other traditions (presbyterian, continental reformed, anglican) were all reformed (though anglicans ended up being more conservatively reformed long term)

then jacob arminius proposed some level of free will, and the arminian protestants split off from the reformed (remonstrants, methodists, and a lot of anglicans). the bulk of american protestants fit in this category

@lizzie @djsumdog @azalea how can someone not believe in a degree of free will? wouldnt God be cruel to reward and punish behavior if we were mere puppets?

@georgia @djsumdog @azalea yeah this is the complaint i was making about calvinism/reformed theology at the start

@djsumdog @azalea the progressive church is a broad spectrum tbh. like you have people who are kinda just doing whatever theologically with little understanding of the faith (same is true of a lot of evangelicals but they get away with it bc they’re politically conservative), and some who arent dissimilar from myself. i think something a bit progressive is the best way to express the apostolic faith

rapture theology? probably heretical.

@lizzie @djsumdog @azalea what exactly is rapture theology? is it different from normal christian eschatology

The rapture, the general idea Christ will return and all the dead spirits will rise to meet him. Believers will be taken from this earth and they'll be years of .. tribulation or something. I think Religion for breakfast does a pretty good recap of it and dispensonationalism:

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

@djsumdog @georgia @azalea yeah exactly. the believers get sucked up into heaven and then everyone else has to deal with a bunch of bad stuff and then the full eschaton is established after that

@lizzie @djsumdog @azalea @georgia god shits in the cereal of the unrighteous or whatever

@djsumdog @azalea @georgia there’s a lot of stuff i would say is bad but not heretical. the reason id go so far as to call it heretical is that it posits the goal of christianity as escape from creation rather than its being made whole

@lizzie @azalea @djsumdog @georgia how even is heresy defined?? like by your “ denomination “ or what have you

I'd say by survival. There were a lot of Valentinians and other believes that are now considered "Gnostic" .. big category for a bunch of smaller beliefs (many that didn't believe in the Demiurge, Monad, Sophia or other things considered Gnostic) .. a lot of them just died off.

Same with a lot of books like Shepard of Hermanos, Gospel of Mary or Thomas. Unpopular books just stop getting copied by priests. You can find many in the Nag Hammadi translations.. I still have a physical copy of that book. It's very interesting.

It's mostly the result of might makes right, trail by conquest, popularity .. really the same way States are made. You could argue that Constantine legitimized Christianity just as much as adopting Christian legitimized Constantine and the Empire. Exact same thing goes for Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan and adopting Islam for the Caliphate.

@jorgaborg @azalea @djsumdog @georgia oh yeah how thats defined varies by denomination. non-protestants would define it by ecumenical councils while protestants often just point to the creeds. others before me have argued that the rapture is a direct contradiction of “the resurrection of the body” as traditionally understood which appears in the apostles creed.

im a bit biased against rapture theology bc this principle of christ as the resurrection is a guiding theological principle for me and without it id have to reject what ive seen of the church fathers.

whether or not something is formally heretical or not isnt the most important thing in the world. what matters is if something is of spiritual danger and that i woild say even less hesitantly is true of the rapture

@djsumdog @lizzie @georgia @azalea …so by whoever’s alive. great. really narrows it down (/lh)

@lizzie @azalea @djsumdog @georgia see, i dont have enough goddamn space in my head for religion. thats one of the reasons im an atheist. i got too much stuff up there already without worrying about heresy

@jorgaborg @azalea @djsumdog @georgia technically “jesus is an orb right now” is a specifically listed heresy by ine if the councils

@lizzie @azalea @djsumdog @georgia in atheism, the only heresy is unironically calling something heretical

@lizzie @azalea @djsumdog @georgia haha wut.

@lizzie @jorgaborg @djsumdog @georgia ah, the anti-physics teacher rule

no spherical jesus in a vacuum

@jorgaborg @azalea @djsumdog @georgia there were a bunch of conflicts over origenism and so origen got anathema(oomf reference)tized for a bunch of random bullshit he may or may not have actually ever taught

@lizzie @azalea @djsumdog @georgia absurd; again we just need empirical evidemce in atheism. we can see/interact with it? means it’s real vro

DJ Jesus from Lucy Daughter of the Devil was sorta spherical .. or at least made with a good amount of round parts.

Checkmate physics cows!

@jorgaborg @lizzie @djsumdog @georgia atheism runs into some pretty big problems when trying to talk about philosophical things (or, trying to apply “science” to philosophy), but tbh christianity has the same problems with being really structure-y, so it basically cancels out

@djsumdog @lizzie @georgia @azalea tjat show kicked ass

@jorgaborg @azalea @djsumdog @georgia the only thing atheists are right about are that God doesnt exist

@azalea @lizzie @djsumdog @georgia philosophy is bs imo; people just do shit

@jorgaborg @azalea @djsumdog @georgia this too is philosophy, just bad philosophy

@lizzie @azalea @djsumdog @georgia i think, therefore.,, uh,,, .. , u,m

@jorgaborg @azalea @djsumdog @georgia still hasnt read on divine names award

the "new atheism" from the 2010s sorta fillzed out because it couldn't really deal with basic questions about meaning and purpose. It fell hard into scientisim. It couldn't address using rationalism to deal with historical controversial topics (9/11 truth, JFK, WW2). I heard reason rallies became their own circle-jerks.

i think, therefore.,, uh,,, .. ,

goon

@djsumdog @lizzie @georgia @azalea my meaning and purpose is to make as big of a stink as is humanly possible about shit not being good, and then fix that. and then do some other shit. maybe go to Titan if i have the time. idk

@jorgaborg @djsumdog @georgia @lizzie tbh if you dig down in the first principles deep enough you sometimes get to something that looks similar to some religious stuff (this isnt a bad thing)

@azalea @lizzie @djsumdog @georgia “be nice and help people” is a religious thing?

@azalea @djsumdog @georgia @lizzie i just think it’s funny that people try to justify religious arguments with basic pack mentality (do a favor for one in need, get helped in own time of need)

@jorgaborg @lizzie @djsumdog @georgia it can be
the reasoning for it can get religion-y sometimes

to be clear i dont mean religion as in “organized bullshit” i mean “belief that isnt ‘certain’ (and is still meaningful anyeah)”

@jorgaborg @azalea @djsumdog @georgia more that if you try getting really rigorous about what “be nice and help people” means, you end up with something approaching religion

@lizzie @azalea @djsumdog @georgia fair enough.

@jorgaborg @azalea @djsumdog @georgia i mean religion and metaphysics overlap a lot

@lizzie @azalea @djsumdog @georgia ok this deepconversationthing hurts my brain in large doses; imma get back to shitposting now. good talk tho! nice to learn about religion in a looser sense

People have always had to work for what they need. Everyone should put in some effort. Both he collectivist and the individualist probably want better worlds, but the trouble are those on the edges that will always take advantage of either socialite leaning.

@jorgaborg @lizzie @djsumdog @georgia idk what “basic pack mentality” means or what you mean by this tbh

@azalea @lizzie @djsumdog @georgia like, think apes. basic basic. ape help sick ape; first ape get sick and then sick-but-now-healthy ape helps first ape (sick) because of help in the past

what is nice? what is helping people? If you give money to a guy on the street, and he immediately spends it on liquor or gambling, are you helping? Sure, judge lest ye be judged, but you might not have a problem with drinking a whole flask of whiskey every night. When does a leg up end up being the removal of their agency?

It gets grey pretty quickly.

@azalea @djsumdog @georgia @lizzie that was borderline incoherent

@djsumdog @jorgaborg @lizzie @georgia the thing about “”individualism”” is like . “oh nooo i cant accept help from anyone because society sees it as bad” doesn’t sound very individualist to me :^)

@jorgaborg @azalea @djsumdog @georgia id argue that christianity is opposed to brute reciprocity. god gives to us because it is good and we should give because it is in itself good.

no worries. g'night fren!

@djsumdog @lizzie @georgia @azalea well obviously helping feed an addiction and not a stomach is the wrong thing; the support in question is more “get this man help with his addiction” obvs

@jorgaborg @lizzie @djsumdog @georgia usually the thing with addiction is if you help them more (i.e. making sure they have stable housing) the addiction becomes a lot easier to deal with

when people go “oh theyll just blow it on drugs i shouldn’t help them because that would be Bad” theyre doing something awful

@georgia @djsumdog @azalea Basically that idea about "god will take all the faithful from the world into heaven all at once" like in yank movies, as opposed to the more normal understanding of the end of days, if I'm guessing what @lizzie is aiming at correctly

@jorgaborg @lizzie @djsumdog @georgia @azalea Does something cease to be real after it passes an event horizon?

@scuti @lizzie @djsumdog @georgia @azalea black holes warp reality ok we can be a little flexible with that