Felagund
2m ago
How if they were not in communion with the pope? (I had the great western schism in mind, but this applies also to the people you are referring to)
Felagund
8hr ago
Do you think that all texts lead to anarchy? The text has an objective meaning aside from the interpretation thereof: the correct stance would be scripture according to the sense genuinely latent in the text.
You may object: but we may disagree on what that sense is. Okay, true. There are disagreements within every religion. Sufficiently bad errors may warrant ecclesiastical or civil (were we to live in a state that still took an interest in such things) censure.
All that said, I'm fine with some degree of looking at tradition and so on.
Felagund
9hr ago
As an aside, I've never heard any Protestant of any denomination say that Michael is Christ; it is certainly not the understanding that I grew up with.
I'm pretty sure there are some Reformed authors who affirm it, can't say that I've really thought about it myself.
Felagund
9hr ago
I know that there are papists who've argued for elements of penal substitution in the atonement. I know Ybarra recently released a book on the subject. No need, of course, to treat many of these theories as exclusive and incompatible.
I haven't read that particular work of Muller, what was he saying the whole time? I generally hear very positive things about him.
I can't say I'm terribly active on this site at the moment, but feel free to DM about religious topics and so on.
Felagund
9hr ago
It's only a problem for people to disagree over what's essential if it is itself essential to judge correctly whether that doctrine is essential, I would think?
Felagund
9hr ago
There are cases of ecumenical councils erring and Pope's preventing the error.
And there are cases of the contrary, as seen in the case of Vigilius at the 2nd council of Constantinople. (Funny you should mention Liberius. I've seen him cited as an example of an erring pope, in that I believe there's some reason to think he signed onto some Arian formulas. But I'd need to look further into that.)
Felagund
9hr ago
I never found the Clement example compelling. This was said shortly after making an extended scriptural case for his position. I read that simply as saying, "we are declaring what God has revealed; heed this word or you invite judgment upon yourself" (which latter point he had also cited plenty of scripture for). I do not understand, then, why everyone makes a big deal out of the passage.
You mean Irenaeus, not Ignatius. You say, "but if you read his letter to Victor all his arguments show he believes Victor has this authority, he's just hoping Victor doesn't use it"; I nowhere see that in the letter.
How large was the church in 1400? Was half of Western Europe not in the church?
Felagund
10hr ago
Francisco Suarez, though a papist, was very influential in every tradition in that era (e.g. I'm told that the 17th century Reformed Aberdeen divine Robert Baron usually follows him), and my understanding was that Suarez was a nominalist.
Felagund
9mo ago
If you want to have a constructive discussion, the single most useful thing you can do is to think about how you might be wrong. It's not easy, I sure don't live up to it as much as I ought to, but I promise. It's worth it.
One real benefit of putting your arguments in writing (in the context of a sincere argument) is that it motivates this. This is a major reason to argue with people that you will disagree with—even if it is hard to convince others, the argument will add nuances to your view, and point out where your position is weaker in a way that is often fruitful in leading to a greater understanding.
Felagund
10mo ago
You can't use DNA evidence from a place to prove you weren't there, which is what he's trying to do.
Felagund
10mo ago
I was pretty sad to see that Louisiana v. Callais was delayed. I was looking forward to that.
Maybe if one reads the 10th amendment broadly?
I suppose the real question is about what relation the founders would have intended the common law to have to the state governments, and what would they have considered to lie within their powers.
Felagund
10mo ago
I don't have an opinion on end times things at the moment (but thanks for the mention!). Among many of the contemporary reformed, I think amillenialism (we're living in the millenium right now) is the most common view, and is probably what you refer to as the most reserved interpretation, though there do exist postmillenials (especially among the Doug Wilson-adjacent) and premillenials. Dispensationalism is usually seen as beyond the pale, though.
Historically, many in e.g. the 17th century read Romans 11 as talking about a future conversion of ethnic Israel to Christianity, though that's less popular of a reading now.
Felagund
10mo ago
Why bother? Because forcing yourself and the other person to dig, think through unexpected things, etc. makes both of you come to more nuanced, defensible, in-touch-with-reality versions of your positions.
And secondly, for the sake of those watching, who may not yet have committed to positions.
I'm agreed with you that we're on a terrible trajectory. E.g. the judiciary and presidency are on a crash course almost no matter what happens, given that, right now, all the district judges are making ridiculous TROs far overstepping their power (so that ignoring the courts is a growing sentiment on the online right), and on the other hand, the democrats want to pack the court. The chances we have a judiciary functioning properly in 30 years feel much lower than I would like. That's just an example, across the board, from both sides we're seeing escalations, radicalization, degradation of norms, which invites more of the same.
Felagund
10mo ago
Could you elaborate on what you meant by this? I'm not tracking perfectly:
Because there's still quite a lot of us on the left who fundamentally dispute the framing of
COVID gamesmanship about religious services or with visas
I very much do not grant this!
Felagund
11mo ago
I'm also curious about what the new version looks like, though I read the web serial version.
Felagund
11mo ago
Yes, but:
- It's so massive that it's actually inconvenient. It's around 3 times the length of the entire Harry Potter series, which is a lot to jump into. 2.If this matters to you, it felt like there were more gay than straight characters.
Felagund
11mo ago
Why would they reject you? My impression was that forecasts were one of your big things?
Felagund
11mo ago
I think the desire to persuade is often to some extent due to vice. See pages 16-18.
Which of those Protestant teachings do you think are damnable?
More options
Context Copy link