*Sigh*
I feel dumber just reading this. Well, shit can also have a very positive impact as fertilizer. Would it be OK for me to call you a little shit then? See the issue?
What Made You A Conservative?
- Thread starter CurtisLemay
- Start date
*Sigh*
I feel dumber just reading this. Well, shit can also have a very positive impact as fertilizer. Would it be OK for me to call you a little shit then? See the issue?
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
mesonoxian
Well-known member
And you voted for the fake catholic?
mesonoxian
Well-known member
Catholics are Christians. You know that, right?
D
Deleted member
Guest
Most modern Christians are atheists and they just don’t know it. Guenon made that observation decades ago and it’s unfortunately only become more true since then.
mesonoxian
Well-known member
What utter nonsense. "You only disagree with me because you're an atheist!" "I'm not an atheist" "Yes you are! You just don't know it".
EDIT: I'll do you one better then, I am a convert to Christianity.
Last edited:
Navarro
Well-known member
We're not talking about that, we're talking about the Dem. Presidential candidate openly rejecting the Catholic Church's teachings on a number of issues and yet going on and on about how his faith informs his political viewpoint.
mesonoxian
Well-known member
Lots of Catholics disagree with some part of their church's teaching. And even more might agree with some element of the moral teaching and think it doesn't make good public policy. That doesn't make them "fake". And the alternative is the guy who brags about his affairs, and sexual assaults and is a known cheat who pretends to be an Evangelical while saying he doesn't ask for forgiveness. He sits there and lets them talk about him like God anointed him to rule. The hypocrisy of the complaining bout Christians voting for Biden is almost painful. I'd rather vote for a fake Catholic than a real anti-Christ.
I agree with @mesonoxian on this one. Attacking him on his Christianity, or his lack of piousness, or a doctrine that's slightly divergent from yours is... not a strong argument. Especially since there are plenty of atheists on your own side of the divide (such as myself).
Sure they do - they eat dead vegetation and return the nutrients to be used again. But when the dead plant matter in question happens to be the structural timbers of your house, that's a problem.
Termites are actually a hobby of mine. But I like them to be out in the wild, not eating my furniture.
It's pretty obvious to normal people that when someone refers to Jews (or any other people) as "termites" he's not praising them for their ability to build big impressive structures and recycle cellulose.
Now let's move on.
There are (or at used to be) tons of people who would identify as "Christian" simply because they weren't Jewish, or Muslim, or Buddhist, or whatever, despite never having been to church since the formality of confirmation.
But I don't think such nominal believers were actually unaware of their lack of piety. If you think you believe in God, then you probably do.
It's the people who claim that they don't who often are kidding themselves, IMHO.
I can assure you that I don't believe in God. If you think I'm lying (to you or myself) that's another issue, but I'm certain that I'm not.
ShieldWife
Marchioness
Are we still talking about termites? There is no way any reasonable person could interpret comparing an ethnic group to termites as anything but a dire insult.
Here in the south, that’s what we call “fightin’ words.”
I’m not sure if it’s productive to argue about who is a “real Christian” and who isn’t. I’m an atheist and solidly on the right side of the spectrum in most regards and there certainly seem to be leftists who are also devout Christians. I would agree that many people who espouse a religion often don’t act as though they believe it, I don’t think that is the primary factor in left vs right (professed) believers.
I don’t see why someone would pretend to be an atheist if they’re not though. Unless we lived in a society where believers are persecuted, like a communist regime, why would a theist pretend, or convince themselves, that they don’t believe in God? I hear Christians say that all the time but I still don’t understand the thinking
Here in the south, that’s what we call “fightin’ words.”
I’m not sure if it’s productive to argue about who is a “real Christian” and who isn’t. I’m an atheist and solidly on the right side of the spectrum in most regards and there certainly seem to be leftists who are also devout Christians. I would agree that many people who espouse a religion often don’t act as though they believe it, I don’t think that is the primary factor in left vs right (professed) believers.
I don’t see why someone would pretend to be an atheist if they’re not though. Unless we lived in a society where believers are persecuted, like a communist regime, why would a theist pretend, or convince themselves, that they don’t believe in God? I hear Christians say that all the time but I still don’t understand the thinking
Often, not always.
I believe you when you say that you don't buy into the worldview you associate with belief in God - that you don't believe in their God, so to speak.
Don't get me started, I'll happily talk on and on about termites. But I'm not going to make silly comparisons between termites and people.
And be careful of termites - the soldiers can bite!
D
Deleted member 88
Guest
@Tyanna of Pentos is arguing from the standpoint that modern Christians live a much more atheistic life, and that modern Christianity has been emptied out of any real spiritual vitality or essence. IIRC Guenon said Protestantism amounted to atheism lite.
Whether or not you concur with the more esoteric aspects of this, I do agree that modern Christianity is a mile wide and inch deep for the most part.
And that most people who claim to be Christian, have no saving faith, and no deep relationship with Jesus whatsoever. Protestantism did make Christianity more and more academic, and less and less focused on communion with God and more studying a book which led eventually to the book itself being rejected and the emergence of atheism.
Whether or not you concur with the more esoteric aspects of this, I do agree that modern Christianity is a mile wide and inch deep for the most part.
And that most people who claim to be Christian, have no saving faith, and no deep relationship with Jesus whatsoever. Protestantism did make Christianity more and more academic, and less and less focused on communion with God and more studying a book which led eventually to the book itself being rejected and the emergence of atheism.
Thanks in large part to Isaac Newton and Rene Descartes. The fathers of modernity.
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't believe in any form of the supernatural. Including a sentient immaterial power that is watching over the world/humanity, or that has created it.
mesonoxian
Well-known member
Only God knows the state of anybody's soul. There is nothing especially esoteric about Christianity. There are mystical heights few people ever glimpse, but they aren't hidden any more than the peak of Everest. They are just hard to reach, requiring an emptying of self, a deep love for others, and a closeness with God through prayer few ever achieve. But even these aren't hidden, and those who reach them share what they can of their experiences.
Newton and Descartes seem like a really weird pick for fathers of modernity. They were influential on the eventual development of mechanism, but neither one is really a modernist. Newton was an alchemist and mystic who spent his time trying to calculate the date of the apocalypse. (So did an ancestor of mine. He went mad.) Descartes abandoned the material in a strategic (but premature) retreat to preserve the mental. I think that was a mistake, there is no need to cast the spiritual out of the physical world, but I don't think it was done from some malice towards spiritual matters.
Now if you'd said Hume and Spinoza I might agree with you. But neither was a Christian.
ShieldWife
Marchioness
I hate termites! I live in a log cabin and we had to exterminate them and then repair the damage they caused. Carpenter bees too! We wage war against wood eating bugs.
I admire you for jumping into the shark tank, @mesonoxian. You're also a lot more composed than I usually am when I'm arguing with all of you on SV.
Anyway, getting into pretty abstract discussions here. I believe there are people in here who are Traditionalists or probably more Evola-ists because the actual founder of Traditionalism converted to Islam and it's yucky now. I don't understand why follow a fascist crank. Nor can I understand how Christians can pal around with this kind of individual. I'm all for interfaith dialogeu but Evola rejected everything about being a Christian and he wanted to replace it all with awful bullshit totally antithetical to Christian morality and metaphysics.
I think we've been over this - it's all William of Ockham's fault!
www.intellectualtakeout.org
Like come on. I love history, there is a lot about the modern world to criticize and even a modern mindset that is also worth criticism. But I detest these simplistic narratives blaming Descartes or whoever for all that.
Even if you say "The Enlightenment is responsible for all modern ills" as some conservative types do, at least they recognize the Enlightenment was a huge movement across many countries and involving many people. They don't say "it's all Kant's fault!"
Notably, blaming Descartes was something popular among German Right Wingers in the Weimar and Nazi period. Hm. Just saying. I actually like reading said right wingers but just gonna guess this is where the idea is coming from in this thread.
Anyway, getting into pretty abstract discussions here. I believe there are people in here who are Traditionalists or probably more Evola-ists because the actual founder of Traditionalism converted to Islam and it's yucky now. I don't understand why follow a fascist crank. Nor can I understand how Christians can pal around with this kind of individual. I'm all for interfaith dialogeu but Evola rejected everything about being a Christian and he wanted to replace it all with awful bullshit totally antithetical to Christian morality and metaphysics.
I think we've been over this - it's all William of Ockham's fault!
William of Ockham: The Man Who Started the Decline of the West
In modern accounts of the decline of the West, it’s become common to blame one man in particular for starting that decline
www.intellectualtakeout.org
Like come on. I love history, there is a lot about the modern world to criticize and even a modern mindset that is also worth criticism. But I detest these simplistic narratives blaming Descartes or whoever for all that.
Even if you say "The Enlightenment is responsible for all modern ills" as some conservative types do, at least they recognize the Enlightenment was a huge movement across many countries and involving many people. They don't say "it's all Kant's fault!"
Notably, blaming Descartes was something popular among German Right Wingers in the Weimar and Nazi period. Hm. Just saying. I actually like reading said right wingers but just gonna guess this is where the idea is coming from in this thread.