/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>3145729
>>christian morality only becomes virtuous and noble when it strays from its original form (in europe) over centuries.
That presupposes a Protestant view of scripture that I don't follow. The Apostolic Churches firstly follow Tradition, which gave us the biblical canon, whereas Protestants try best to stick to an 'original form'. For us that sounds as absurd as saying that the true form of an oak is an acorn.

>the christian scriptures were translated for the european audience using graeco-roman philosophical terms
Sure, that isn't a secret. The Logos from the Book of John is a term from Greek philosophy

> the small aspects of the traits of master morality you will find within christian thought are simply echos of imperfect communication, and they are self-deception.
This dichotomy of master-slave morality is ridiculous. Scheler rips this apart in Ressentment, I recommend you read that

>the renaissance as a rediscovery of the original idea aesthetic and beauty was only possible through the crumbling of christian worldview.
Art existed before the Renaissance, all that happened was a rediscovery of naturalistic ideas which was taught by proponents of Scholasticism. Beauty was seen as an ideal long before, one of the transcendentals in fact

>need i remind you that christian law often either outlawed or severely hindered...
That doesn't mean much, the Church also commissioned all sorts of things.

>stop deluding yourself.
I'd advise you to do the same anon. There was a time when I thought as you did, but studying the other side (Hopkins, Tomberg, Burke, Newman, Scheler) led me to change my views on this