/lit/ - Literature

>although not necessarily Catholic
there's your mistake

Please take this somewhere other than /lit/, please.

>>10246437
Why's that? I have this notion that Catholicism perverted Christianity, but if this isn't the case I don't care.

>>10246440
I came to lit specifically to avoid bias. My question is genuine and I am not trying to start the kind of arguments prevalent on 4chan, but I guess that's my mistake.

>>10246458
OP, the advice I would give you is don't go and read any materials/commentators on their viewpoints. The Bible says to test everything, so going with that you should be able to test those things AFTER you're familiar with The Bible. Just get an Old King James or a more literal translation and just read it.

I would recommend reading Genesis and Exodus, and then maybe Joshua-2 Samuel and jump into some things in the New Testament, 1-2 Gospel books, Acts, and Romans for starters. Maybe mixing in some Proverbs and Psalms as well.

Read the important books of the bible (Genesis, Exodus, Job, Matthew, etc) and decide from there

Also study bibles are really useful to understanding the beliefs of a given tradition, I've got the Orthodox one and the footnotes are extremely thorough and extensive. There's study bibles for the main branches of Christianity if you're not interested in Orthodoxy

>>10246505
>>10246543

Thanks, the King James bible already had my eye but now that's definitely the version I think I'll pick up.

Are you participating Christians? Can't say I'm very interested in being involved in the community, although that's probably extremely contrary to christian beliefs.

>>10246563

I'm just starting to get into it and learn about it, most of my interest was sparked after reading the Brother's Karamazov. Not participating in the church isn't that contradictory, most people who I've talked to about church attendance believe that a relationship with God is more important than going to church weekly

For a lot of the theological questions that I had, I found it helpful to go and meet with a priest. I just wrote down different questions that Christian theology raised which seemed contradictory and went and asked a local priest what he thought.

>>10246433

>The Orthodox Way by Kallistos Ware

Learn the fundamentals of Christian theology: God as Trinity, God as Man, God as Spirit, etc.

>The Orthodox Church by Kallistos Ware

Learn the history of the one, holy, and apostolic Church. Know the continuity of the Church from Pentecost to now.

>The Orthodox Study Bible

Filled with footnotes drawing from the Church Fathers, informative articles about core Christian beliefs and doctrine.

>http://www.newadvent.com/fathers/

Read the Church Fathers, especially St John Chrysostom who goes through many books of the Bible verse by verse.

>Podcasts: The Arena, the Morning Offering, Roads from Emmaus, Mysterium Fasces

>>10246689
>>The Orthodox Way by Kallistos Ware
This is good, and I own a copy, but it has several dogmatic errors - you can find a good essay/review by Heiromonk Patapaious online which highlights and corrects the errors. It is essential reading if you are reading this book seriously. I find the errors baffling for such a renowned theologian because >The Orthodox Church by Kallistos Ware is excellent and correct.

>>10246433
>>10246689
The Cosmic Mystery of Jesus Christ - Maximos the Confessor
An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith - St John of Damascus
The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church - Vladimir Lossky
Nihilism - Fr Seraphim Rose
These are some of my faves and entry-level, you should be familiar with the Greeks to get the most from them though - Plato and Aristotle primers would be useful.

>>10246433
Catholicism vs Orthodox pros and cons?

>>10246757
Vlad the Impaler converted from Orthodox to Catholic so he could kill more turkroaches.

>>10246757
Catholics have the Rosary, the most sublime of prayers.

>>10246433

KJV is a fine translation. NKJV and ESV are okay too, less poetic but more accessible.

Check out the early church fathers,
1. St. John of Damascus' "exposition of the faith" is a good start: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3304.htm

2. St. Athanasius "on the incarnation"
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2802.htm

3. St Justin Martyr "Dialogue with Typhro the Jew"
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0128.htm

4. Kierkegaard "Purity of Heart is to Will One Thing" and also his "Practice in Christianity"

5. Frithjof Schuon - "The Fullness of God", edited by Cutsinger

6. The Orthodox Way, by Kalistos Ware

7. Lazarus, Come Forth! by Valentin Tomberg (warning Catholic, not orthodox, but still a great read)

8. The Imitation of Christ, by Kempis (again catholic, but very valuable)

9. The Philokalia

10. The Way of the Pilgrim, by anonymous russian

most if not all these books can be found on http://libgen.pw/

check out this podcast, "mysterium fasces" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1s0AlJntx0I
good ortho twitters to follow: https://twitter.com/valkpol
https://twitter.com/Rick_RIB4EVER
https://twitter.com/theillegit


Don't you dare NOT go to church every sunday https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPhDae6Pr2U

>>10246433
Not trying to tip my fedora or anything but why do you feel this is necessary? Aren't there other methods of fulfillment/moral guidance?

I mean, it's cool if it works out though. I know many good Christians who have used it as a moral guide and for spiritual reasons but I feel like there are other methods to feel fulfilled.

>>10246757
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qdr7u6IP6sg

Catholics believe in original sin, that we are born morally guilty of Adam and Eve's sin, similar to most protty sects, while Orthodox believe in ancestral sin, that we are not born "guilty" for Adam's sin but we face the consequences of his actions.

We have different understandings of Heaven and Hell. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Romanides#Heaven_and_Hell

Catholics venerate Mary a bit too much, some call her "coredemptrix"
Catholic catechism 841 claims muslims and catholics worship the same God, which is blasphemy and heresy.
Vatican 2 as with most catholic innovations is "shit" after the 7th ecumenical council is null and void and not guided by the holy spirit.

Catholic church banned clerical marriage around the 10th century, which is actually against scripture since bishops/presbyters can/should be the husband of one wife. Also since monastics take vows of celibacy the ruling is quite redundant. Orthodox priests are allowed to marry/remain married, ortho monks are not.

We differ on the Nicene Creed, catholics accepted it originally but then changed it to calim that the holy spirit proceeds from the father and the son, mostly this was done for political reasons, Pope Leo at the time tried to reject it but the emperor Charlemagne overruled him.

Catholicism is less true to tradition, protestantism is even worse.
The best liturgies are orthodox divine liturgies, catholic mass doesn't compare.

>>10246793
most sublime prayer is the one Jesus taught us "Our Father" ... followed by the Jesus prayer, see hesychasm.

>>10246834
morality not grounded in a transcendent and personal "Good" is not morality at all, but an idol of your own creation. Morality has to have teleology that transcends utilitarian motives, otherwise it falls into perversion and relativism.

Why are you theophobic? Seek and you shall find.

>>10246818
>The Orthodox Way, by Kalistos Ware
See>>10246717

>>10246793
>clogging up your mind with vain repetitions
>not practicing silent contemplation, the purest form of prayer

>>10246903
can you mention which errors?

>>10246915
repetition itself is not a problem, neither is length of prayer, but vain repetitions, vain prayers are the problem, whether long or short, loud or silent.

>>10246607
>went and asked a local priest what he thought
How did that work out? Which church? How did you do that exactly? Did you go up to the priest, tapped his shoulder, cleared your throat and...?

>>10246689
>The Orthodox This
>The Orthodox That
That doesn't even sound biased at all.

>>10247001
>orthodoxy? biased and medieval
agreed. lets make Christianity "cool" and "diverse" again

>>10246919
>can you mention which errors?
Not specifically im abit drunk, but he quotes both the Babylonian Talmud, some Gnostic text, and a bunch of other heresies. Check out Patapaios' review/essay here: http://orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/review_tow.aspx

>>10247033
thanks brother, I'll have to read that soon, when I get time.

>>10246853
>Morality has to have teleology that transcends utilitarian motives

>>10247051
yep, because neither pleasure nor pain, nor the desires of the "majority" should enter as motives when one must do what must be done.

>>10246853
>being this ignorant
You could follow literally any other ethical system other than utilitarianism.

If you're basing your morality on actions that are reflective of a system of arbitrary divine laws (Divine Command), then that leaves you in a scenario where you cannot provide any reasoning for moral actions.
Since you cannot ground your reasoning in qualitative/quantitative 'facts' derived from the self or others, then a question such as “Why is this behaviour good?” cannot be answered in any way other than “because it reflects God’s nature”.
Your moral reasoning at this points becomes extremely impotent, and can't answer the immense amount of moral questions that exist beyond the contextual scope of those set laws.

>>10246433
Read the New Testament.
Personally I wouldn't trust any Christian advice unless it came from someone who dedicates their life to helping the poor in body and spirit.

You made the right choice with Christianity.

Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy have claims to apostellistic succession, meaning that their bishops inherited their offices from the Twelve Apostles. Stay away from the "liberal" or "modernist" or "cultural" followers. That goes for Protestant denominations, too.

If you want an old school apostellistic Bible, buy a Douray-Rheims. Reading Bibles translated centuries ago is a literary experience. Modern translations are lame.

Protestantism is a clusterfuck. Mainline denominations like Lutherism are dying. Evangelicals like Baptists are legit, though. At least the ones who aren't Israel worshippers. Anything else is pozzed to hell or cult territory. Anglicanism is dead. Thank God for putting it out of its misery. Then there are non Christian religions masquerading as Christianity, like Mormonism. AVOID.

If you want a Protestant Bible, get a King James Version aka Authorized Version. Not the 1611 reproduction version but the one from later with standardized spellings. Don't get a New King James Version, though.

Most KJV you get will have the Apocrypha removed. That's a minus.

KJV is based on the Mesoretic Text, which was edited by the Pharisees to remove prophecies relating to Christ and other shenanigans. DR is based on a different source, the Greek Bible I think. DR is the most trustworthy and has the same old timey cadence. It isn't as influential on the English language as the KJV though.

I suggest you buy both a DR and a KJV plus the KJV Apocrypha and compare them both. Also get yourself a book of Dore illustrations as a treat. Buy leatherbound bibles if you can afford it.

Modern translations are based on new manuscripts discovered in caves. These were written by Gnostics or other heretics and even though they are older than other surviving manuscripts they were doctored.

Modern translations have been carefully doctored to corrupt the text as much as possible for political reasons.

Stay away from study Bibles or reference Bibles. You just want the text itself. You don't want commentaries. Those are all written with agendas in mind. Just read the Bible. Then read up on the theology afterward.

Start reading with the Gospels. Then finish the NT. Then go back and read the OT plus Apocrypha. Then read the NT again.

When you're done with that read the Church Fathers.

Avoid the Pseudepigapha and Gnostic shit until you're mature in the faith.

Once you're done with the Fathers read the Catechisms of the various Churches you're interested in. Start Attending various services now.

Christianity is the one true faith. I don't know which denomination is right, so tread carefully. Best of luck to you, brother.

>>10247074
>Since you cannot ground your reasoning in qualitative/quantitative 'facts' derived from the self or others

morality says how facts "ought" to be arranged, and how we "ought" to relate to them -- it is not determined by facts themselves. So facts can tell us how to build a bridge or how to perform an abortion, but facts can't tell us where we "ought" to build a bridge, or whether we "ought" to perform abortions.

>If you're basing your morality on actions that are reflective of a system of arbitrary divine laws (Divine Command), then that leaves you in a scenario where you cannot provide any reasoning for moral actions.
they aren't arbitrary they are in accord with our nature which is made in the image of God, and the more we align ourselves with them the more harmonious our souls become. We are meant to be Lawful Good. Period. Not "utilitarian" or "pragmatic" or "consequentialist" or whatever modern nonsense has come up with that tries to undermine what is actually Good for man.

>>10246433
I've mostly been interested in philosophy and theology by extension and Catholicism has a lot to offer here, while Orthodoxy seems to be completely barren in comparison to reading material. But from the theology I've read I can recommend Jesus of Nazareth by Benedict XVI, probably the best theological text of the century and valuable to anyone trying to understand how to think like a Christian.
John Henry Newman has been of great interest to me by extension, because he provides the best overview of religious epistemics and has in many ways anticipated Wittgenstein and influenced MacIntyre, his Essay on Development of Christian Doctrine, Apologia Pro Vita Sua and Essay on Grammar of Ascent are incredible. His mediations on the suffering of Christ are superb as well.
From novels, I think that The Book of the New Sun, as strange as it might be, provides the clearest aesthetic experience of faith of men across the ages and explores how Providence works superbly.
Bible translations aren't 'perverted' unless we are talking about bad translations from the time of Reformation or contemporary attempts to make it accessible and female friendly or whatever. Any edition Ignatius Press has should be good.

>>10246607
Without the Eucharist, outside of special situations, one can't really have a relationship with God.

>>10247066
>utilitarianism
>pleasure
>desires

>>10247098
>So facts can tell us how to build a bridge or how to perform an abortion, but facts can't tell us where we "ought" to build a bridge, or whether we "ought" to perform abortions.
This is highly debatable from the perspective of Christian philosophy- all facts are teleological and contain final and temporal ends. Abortion is an act which necessarily breaks the factual ends of reproduction and life, therefore morally impermissible.

>>10247118
yes but that assumes natural law which is really just an extension of Divine Command embedded in nature itself: an action is bad because it contradicts the purpose it is "meant" to have by design, it is not immoral because of utilitarian considerations about the mob or and whats pragmatic for it.

either way "utility" is not a moral category, neither is happiness nor pleasure nor pragmatism.

>>10247117
utilitarianism is hedonism dispersed among the mob, the fact that it sometimes renames "pleasure" as "utility" does not hide this blatant fact. It is not a moral category.

Ignatius Bible or Didache Bible.

>>10247128
>happiness is pleasure
>utilitarianism is welfare hedonism

>>10246793
>most sublime of prayers
>not the prayers Jesus himself told us
Catholics, I swear. This is why protestants say you worship Mary

>>10246818
NKJV is a pretty pointless translation, it uses the same outdated textual sources as the KJV but updates the language. The point of the KJV is the beautiful language, and the point of new translations is better sources and modern English, NKJV fills a niche that doesn't need to be filled.

ESV is very good, but you may as well get the RSV, which it's a revision of. RSV doesn't have the ESV's evangelical protestant bias and you can get an edition with all the Catholic and Orthodox deuterocanon. There's also the NRSV which has some odd readings but is the most up to date academic translation out there.

As always, several translations cross-referenced is the way to go. Personally I use the NRSV, ESV, NASB, NABRE, and NJPS.

>>10247150
>guys listen utilitarianism is really special and complex and totally NOT hedonism for the mob or pleasure based!

"The Classical Utilitarians, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, identified the good with pleasure, so, like Epicurus, were hedonists about value."
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/utilitarianism-history/

>>10247088
>DR is based on a different source, the Greek Bible I think
No, it's a translation of Jerome's Vulgate, which is itself a translation from Hebrew manuscripts.

Congratulations, you played yourself.

>>10247156
Do you not know that the rosary is made out of Pater Noster which is that prayer and the Ave Maria which are the words of the Archangel with the ending being a contemplation of Christ? This is why Protestantism is the reddit of Christianity.

>>10247165
Yes, hail Mary, the fourth member of the trinity

>>10247163
>Hebrew manuscripts
But not the Mesoretic Text (the Pharisee Edition of the OT), which is my main concern with the KJV.

Looked it up and DR is translated into English from the Vulgate, which is Latin, which was translated from Hebrew (OT) and Greek (NT).

>>10247177
>thus all generations shall call me blessed...except protestants
Look you can venerate and sing praises to Mary and say the hail mary prayer without worshiping her.

>>10247162
>JSM utilitarianism is the only ""true"" one
>being autistically contrarian after getting btfo
>using wiki summaries to argue about something you don't understand

>>10246433
Read these.

When shopping for a Bible try to get a large print one.

It's ridiculous the tiny text they expect you to read.

religion threads are the cancer of this board

>>10247182
>JSM and Bentham can't be trusted to define Utilitarianism
>Stanford university can't be trusted to define MY special brand of new-age Utilitarianism either!
brainlet

>>10247177
Ah yes, the accursed words of the Archangel from the New Testament, we must never speak them for they come from the Devil.

>>10247023
mfw your pic.

A lot of good recomendations already would

The Miracle of Theism by Mackie
The Coherence of Theism by Swinburne
The Cloud of Unknowing
The last supersition by Feser
Suma Con Gentiles by Aquinas

What are your views on Catholicism?

>>10247023
You known its not a dichotomy

>>10247196
>only classic utilitarianism is utilitarianism
>I can't even read the very articles I link
>moore, sedgwick, hare and singer didn't exist
>/pol/ pictures, contrarianism and buzzwords
It's nice to see who's really behind all the pseudointellectual religion pushing around here.

>>10247098
>morality says how facts "ought" to be arranged, and how we "ought" to relate to them

Doesn't this also mean being selective with the truth? How are facts, being facts, arranged?

I would say that it is facts which direct the functioning of morality.
Let us take the example of opening a door and walking into a room, to which someone says 'that's rude'. Your understanding of moral violation then relies on the deliberate hunting through of memory to find evidence of something that warranted that person's statement (in this case, opening the door).

If the person made this statement without any contextual reference, then it means nothing. For this reason it seems that the familiar social fact is necessary for the moral statement to make any sense.
Morality in this sense, is learned from interaction.

Consequently, couldn't an ethical system of Divine Command, which points to a list of arbitrary rules rather than familiar personal evidence, be swapped for (or just as valid as) another system of arbitrary rules?
I mean, the core practitioners of these systems gravitate towards it because it aligns with their own cultural and spiritual upbringing, rather than being correlative to any objective truth.

For this latter point, one could argue that natural law tries to fill this objective gap. Yet at the same time we run into a whole sleuth of other problems once we try to equate the good with natural phenomena.

>>10247232
>>moore, sedgwick, hare and singer ;)
the negative hedonism of "minimizing suffering/pain" is still hedonism.
traps are still gay.
any form of "utilitarianism" is amoral and never approaches what is "good" and there's nothing u can do about it lmao

>>10247238
>how do I into morality and find out what is good?
first read Plato. then read the bible.

>>10247238
I don't know of a single Catholic philosopher who endorses the divine command theory for example and do not understand the focus on it as opposed to any other theory that actually has worthwhile representatives.

>>10246844
I was very close to converting to Catholicism because I thought between the two main apostolic Churches there weren't enough meaningful theological differences to forego the massiveness and unity of the Catholic Church. I never really cared superficial theological contentions, such as the papacy, purgatory, infant baptism...etc. But before committing to Catholicism, I started reading up on how each church approached the things that are theologicaly significant to me, such as eternal hell, original sin, divine mystery, theosis, the problem of evil, and the status of reason. The Orthodox theology was superior on all accounts. It astonished me that not nearly as many people talk about the important differences as much as they talk about pointless shit like infant baptism.

>>10247266

Divine command simply reflects what is already natural law due to the fact that we are made in God's nature and are supposed to imitate him and his ways.

"For Christians, natural law flows not from divine commands, but from the fact that man is made in God's image, man is empowered by God's grace. Living the natural law is how man displays the gifts of life and grace, the gifts of all that is good. Consequences are in God's hands, consequences are generally not within man's control, thus in natural law, actions are judged by three things: (1) the person's intent, (2) the circumstances of the act and (3) the nature of the act. The apparent good or evil consequence resulting from the moral act is not relevant to the act itself." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

>>10247274
> fact that we are made in God's nature
*made in God's image, not in his nature
oops

>>10247254
>>moore, sedgwick, hare and singer ;)
>the negative hedonism
None of them are related to negative utilitarianism.
>le ebyn "traps are/aren't gay" meme
>I'm rite ur rong haha btfo xD
Stop shitting up my board and go back to /r/4chan, autistic child.

>>10247193
Man, that edition of Catcher in the Rye has got to be one of the most iconic book covers of all time.

>>10247280
>singer animals have rights! because they suffer! ummm lmao
>we're obliged to reduce the suffering of everything uhhh because reasons
ya, negative hedonism is shit

>>10247269
BORN TO ANATHEMATIZE
FLORENCE IS A FUCK
鬼神 kill em all 1431
I am an Orthodox Pillar
410,757,864,530 dead Thomists

I think Mere Christianity is a great entry point and easy to read in a day if you want.

>>10247280
I'm sorry but for someone trying to play an enlightened utilitarian here you have provided no reasons to think the other anon is wrong, in fact he at least linked to a quality article from an encyclopedia.

>>10247296
>babby samefagging
Already told you - back to /r/4chan, my lad.

>>10246853
>morality not grounded in a transcendent and personal "Good" is not morality at all, but an idol of your own creation
>implying God isn't an idol of your own creation

>>10247300
idols only exist relative to the one true God.

>>10246433
Are you “walking amidst dismay and hope”, as Tolstoy (the other Tolstoy) wrote?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXIltZCAaxE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtE3VozRymM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-XHIjuUFvo

>>10247261
I've read all of Plato's available work, maybe you should try reading your Aristotle?
Plato's form of the good has no standing here because it explains nothing in the physical world, hence we have no reason to believe in it. It adds nothing to our day to day ethics.
As a form it is both defined and unknown, at contradiction with itself.

And which Bible would be the right one?

>>10247324
>And which Bible would be the right one?
Wasn't this answered like 6 times in this thread?

>>10247324
>Plato's form of the good has no standing here because it explains nothing in the physical world
>doesn't understand how the physical world is a transient shadow, a moving image of eternal forms
oh I thought you said you "read Plato"

>And which Bible would be the right one?
the Koine Greek

>there are people who still have emotional ties to christianity
Literal babies. I have no idea why it's so hard for people to accept that Christianity was a mistake, and that the entire thing is nothing more than metaphysical nonsense.

If you're really in need of a religion, however, I recommend paganism. Christianity owes all of its major philosophical thought to pagans.
Check this guy out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemistus_Pletho
>Zeus as supreme sovereign, containing within himself all being in an undivided state; his eldest child, motherless, is Poseidon, who created the heavens and rules all below, ordaining order in the universe. Zeus' other children include an array of "supercelestial" gods, the Olympians and Tartareans, all motherless.

>>10247333
Nice try.
If you are going to identify the good with the eternal form, then you must explain how it relates to reality. In order for any real action to belong to the Form of the Good, it must participate in the eternal form and have the properties characteristic of wholeness in order to be in its proper form.

>*hits blunt* the good exists in a state of being and non-being bro
You're living in delusion

>>10247349
There he is! The neofagan LARPer. We've been expecting you. Please go take a seat next to the gaytheist.

>>10247349
>>Zeus as supreme sovereign, containing within himself all being in an undivided state
Zeus has parents, Cronus and Rhea, and they ruled the Ancient World after taking control from Uranus. And they're all petty and conceited small 'g' gods.

if you want to learn good paganism go read Plato and Plotinus, they were paving the way for monotheism and the "true God" aka Christ.

>>10247401
>tfw controlling the ancient world with my anus

>>10247406
deep, deep, deep is the hole of philosophy

>>10247409
heh

>>10247181
I have no problem with "venerating" Mary, I don't think anyone does, really. The issues other Christians have with Catholicism begin with *prayers* directed to people. Mary, all the Saints, whatever. How do you reconcile praying to dead people with Christianity, exactly? I'm genuinely very curious. I see no Biblical basis for this whatsoever.

>>10247427
By dead people I assume you are trying to change it up rethorically from saints in Haven looking at the face of God. As far as biblical sources we have both Macabees that Luther removed from his own Bible because it didn't fit the narrative and the Acts having numerous mentions of people praying for each other and no reason to believe they would stop once reunited with God. That as well as the practice of the first Christians, as shown in the writings of the Fathers.

>>10247427
>I see no Biblical basis for this whatsoever
Yet you see Biblical basis for believing in a Biblical basis based on a Bible compiled by Orthodox and Catholic bishops? The contradictions are enough to make my head spin!

For the Bible, the Douay–Rheims seems good.

Aquinas' Catena Aurea to get a compilation of the commentaries made by the early Fathers of the Church on the Gospels.
http://dhspriory.org/thomas/CAMatthew.htm

I'd say start with the Holy Gospels (with the commentaries from the Catena Aurea if you want to deepen your understanding).
Then move on to the Old Testament if you feel like it.
The Pentateuch and the Historical Books may seem a bit rough, but make sure to read Tobit.
I strongly advise you to read the Poetical Books of the Bible and the Prophets.

I also strongly suggest that you go to a (SSPX if possible) Holy Mass. It's important.
http://sspx.org/en/mass-locator here you can find the closest one.

You can deepend several different things after that :
-Philosophy. The "three tutors of the Medieval West" were saint Augustine and Dionysius the Areopagite (platonician/neoplatonician side) and Boethius (more aristotelician).
You can move to several different others after that. The best, as he does a synthesis of all the best, is of course saint Thomas Aquinas. But some other are very interesting, for example Gerson.

-Monastic writings. The Apophthegmata Patrum are a great source of spirituality. You can add to that the different monastic Orders' rules as they can be inspirational. Also, the writings of saint Francis of Assisi.

-Mystics. Dionysius for a start, but then there's a lot of others. You must keep in mind that they had a very good grasp of the dogma and of the Scripture in order to avoid interpreting them bizarrely as some tend to.
The Imitation of Jesus Christ is a basic and will always be of good help. Saint Thérèse of Lisieux is probably the most adapted to our modern era, focusing on sanctity and simplicity. But older mystics are very good too. Saint Hildegarde, Hadewijch, Tauler and Eckhart (even if he made theological mistakes) for the Germanic side ; saint Angela of Foligno, saint Catherine of Siena, saint Teresa of Avila, saint Joan of the Cross for the Latin and Spanish side.

>>10246689
>Orthodox
>Schismatic
You can't be both.

>>10246818
>Schuon
please...

>>10247177
>I don't understand what ORA PRO NOBIS means

>>10247444
That's very cool and all, maybe they do pray for us in Heaven, but again, I don't see how that justifies praying to a human being. It's utterly redundant at best - you have direct access to God in prayer - and contrary to Christian teaching at worst. Jesus himself makes it pretty clear how one should pray, and: "no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

>>10247456
I don't think there's any contradiction in believing that God has, to a significant extent, guided scripture through the ages.
I don't hold any one denomination or human organization to be infallible, or perfectly true to all of scripture, however.

>>10247475
>I don't hold any one denomination or human organization to be infallible, or perfectly true to all of scripture, however.
Who said anything about infallibility? The point is, if you're going to talk about "Biblical bases", then you need to first figure out which version of the Bible you hold authoritative (and why), because the various Bibles certainly didn't fall down to Earth from God's lap, they were compiled by certain real-world persons belonging to real-world denominations.

>>10247475
Praying to a human being is asking for his or her Intercession. A saint has no power per se, but asks God in our stead because they are more worthy than us.
And line up a list of things Jesus was clear about, get 20 people and you'll get 20 interpretations on what he was clear about, that is to say nothing about the Bible is clear, hence after you remove God granted authority of his Church, everything becomes rather arbitrary.

>>10246844
Is it possible to be Orthodox and not a follower of Palamas? Like how not all Catholics are Thomist.

>>10247489
Yes, and I'm perfectly fine with Catholic/Orthodox bibles. I'm fine with their churches as well. I do take issue with some of their teachings, but, as I said, that applies somewhat to any denomination/larger body of believers.
Do you mind explaining what any of this has to do with my original claim that there's no basis for certain beliefs in the Bible, Catholic or not?

>>10247491
>Praying to a human being is asking for his or her Intercession
There is already one who acts as the intercessor, hence we pray in his name.

>A saint has no power per se, but asks God in our stead because they are more worthy than us
[citation needed]
Seriously. Again, I am not aware of any verse in the Bible that teaches or condones praying to another human being. Happy to be corrected.

>they are more worthy than us
No, we're perfectly worthy.
>Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
>For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
>Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

The one clear set of instructions Jesus gives about praying is, as you know, "Our Father, which art in heaven.."

>that is to say nothing about the Bible is clear
I strongly disagree. I think just about all that really matters, as far as salvation and all that is concerned, is perfectly clear. Otherwise, the very basis of the religion is gravely undermined. Arbitrary indeed, and where is your basis for this claim of authority, and authoritative hierarchy if not in the Bible? Bit circular, no?

>>10247602
And:
>this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us:
>And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him.

>>10247401
Plato's God is pretty different to Jewish monotheism, it's more like an ultimate intelligent principle that everything emanates from, not a willfull creator who is also personal.

>>10247602
>I strongly disagree.
Disagree all you want, but comparison of doctrines between Evangelicals, Catholics, Orthodox, Unitarians, Baptists, Calvinists, Albignesians, Arians, Gnostics, Lutherans and so on speaks to this.
>I think just about all that really matters, as far as salvation and all that is concerned, is perfectly clear.
And in these groups how many would agree with you? Catholics for example would say that you as a heretic cannot be saved at all and they've been the largest group of Christians across history, as you are not a part of his Church and are thus closed from the sacraments.
>Otherwise, the very basis of the religion is gravely undermined.
Yes, the epistemic basis of Protestantism is shallow and cannot sustain itself without constant ruptures and changes.
>Arbitrary indeed, and where is your basis for this claim of authority, and authoritative hierarchy if not in the Bible?
The claim for authority need not be in the Bible at all (even if it is) because the claim is mostly historical- the God Man Jesus Christ had 12 apostles who then had their own apostles, based on the authority Christ had given them and which they passed on. If there was no mention of it at all it would still be true because the second and third generation of apostles and every other after them testified to this and this is the historical Christian belief.

>>10247760
>comparison of doctrines between Evangelicals, Catholics, Orthodox, Unitarians, Baptists, Calvinists, Albignesians, Arians, Gnostics, Lutherans and so on speaks to this
I don't follow. Does the existence of Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses also speak to this? Or, to bring it further.. oh. You already mentioned Gnosticism. That's a very curious addition to the list.
What it mostly speaks to is human fallibility. I would also say that actually significant doctrinal differences among the main denominations are few and far between(if you have anything specific in mind, do say, but that of course opens a whole separate discussion). Mostly, they are essentially just varying flavors on top of the same basic truths which constitute "Christianity". Some can even be reduced to differences in temperament. And yes, interpretation - again, mostly in matters that don't concern the core beliefs.

>Catholics for example would say that you as a heretic cannot be saved at all
Oh, well, good thing conditions for salvation are laid out clearly throughout the Bible, and none of them have much to do with any human governing body, as far as I can tell.

>>10248453
>I don't follow. Does the existence of Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses also speak to this? Or, to bring it further.. oh. You already mentioned Gnosticism. That's a very curious addition to the list.
Yes, it does. It is a strong argument against the it's "clear teaching". We can't agree on almost anything and to pretend somehow it is is nothing but digging your head in the sand and pretending the Bible alone somehow is a non-ambiguous about just about everything once removed from a set mode of thought, or rather tradition.
>What it mostly speaks to is human fallibility. I would also say that actually significant doctrinal differences among the main denominations are few and far between(if you have anything specific in mind, do say, but that of course opens a whole separate discussion).
Oh man, the differences between Orthodoxy, Catholicism on one side and Protestantism on the other are so vast it's quite possible to argue we don't belong to the umbrella term of Christianity together. Sacraments, salvation, the number of bloody books in the Bible, nature of sin, social teachings, relations of the persons of the Trinity, veneration of saints, the entire theological framework. There's chasms separating apostolic Christianity and the post-reformation denominations. If you think the fact that the Orthodox and Catholics see Protestants as closed from salvation for the mortal sin of heresy and rejection of Christ and his body and blood, damning you to Hell is somehow a small difference of interpretation, I don't know what to say. It's like saying the difference between the Arians and the Catholics/Orthodox at the time were small.
>Mostly, they are essentially just varying flavors on top of the same basic truths which constitute "Christianity". Some can even be reduced to differences in temperament. And yes, interpretation - again, mostly in matters that don't concern the core beliefs.
This only speaks to a complete ignorance of Catholic (and I'm assuming Orthodox) theology. Any apostolic Christian would say that the Eucharist is the absolutely most important event in our lives, where we live (participate in) the sacrifice of the Calvary and eat the body and blood of Christ (the very literal substance) as that substance is the key to our salvation and confession, the remedy for our sins, without which salvation is almost impossible, if somehow you never commit a mortal sin.
>Oh, well, good thing conditions for salvation are laid out clearly throughout the Bible, and none of them have much to do with any human governing body, as far as I can tell.
Ah yes. Clearly, so clearly that the way you see salvation is completely different to how it was seen in the say 6th or 11th or 14th century and it appeared somewhere after the 15th, probably being at least a few hundred years later.

>Then Muhammad stood in the gate of the camp, and said, ‘Who is on Allah’s side? Come to me!’ And all the sons of Abu Bakr gathered around him. He said to them, ‘Thus says Allah, the God of the believers, “Put your sword on your side, each of you! Go back and forth from gate to gate throughout the camp, and each of you kill your brother, your friend, and your neighbor.”’ The sons of Abu Bakr did as Muhammad commanded, and about three thousand of the people fell on that day. Muhammad said, ‘Today you have ordained yourselves for the service of the Allah, each one at the cost of a son or a brother, and so have brought a blessing on yourselves this day.’
Man, the Quran is trash
Oh wait, that's Exodus 32:26-29 with the names changed

>>10248813
>Oh wait, that's Exodus 32:26-29 with the names changed
Is there anyone who couldn't tell?

>>10247205
what about the meme catholic starter pack?

>>10247205
swinburne is orthodox lol

>>10247205
Man, that picture is spot-on.

>>10249629
Needs something like
>I suggest the Douay-Rhemis Bible, a translation from the original Latin
>We must submit to authority of Peter, who is infallible in matters of faith and morals, except in the case of Vatican II because it is wrong
>MUH KEYS

>>10247129
This

>>10249636
I know but not only is it helpful to partner his work with Mackies his book isnt an apology or justification for East Orthodoxy

>>10249760
why don't you like orthodoxy?

Dirty Protestant here, obviously the bible is a good starting point, KJV is far and away the most beautiful translation, but if that really bothers you the ESV isn't too bad. Mere Christianity by Lewis is a great entry-level book in it's attempts to stay out of the Catholic/Orthodox/Protestant argument and just cover the universal basics.

>>10249772
>why don't you like orthodoxy?
I don't, just wanted to provide some balance to the thread had it been Catholic heavy I would have posted a deus vault meme and different recommendations

Orthodoxy and Catholicism have anice ancient split. You won't get a straight answer in this thread. But Protestantism is pure shit.

>>10246689
>Mysterium Fasces
>loving both Jesus and some romanian guy from the 1930s who was too edgy for the nazis and went around skinning people

>>10246433
peter is the rock

>>10249954
Peter's faith is the rock

I see there so much eastern-christianity-tendention. Why so?

>>10246458

The Eucharist is important in Christianity and recognized by orthodox sects.

St Ignatius of Antioch lays down some of the early Christian beliefs from around the turn of the first century and confirms many rites and traditions only found in orthodoxy.

>>10249963
jesus changed the guy's name to literally rock

>>10249969
4chins are tired of the pope-pedophile and tv-preachers

>>10249981
Yes, it is a pun. There is no consensus patrum on the passage and the keys (binding/loosing) are given to all of the apostles in Mt. 18.

>>10249969
Typical 4chan contrarianism mixed with the fact that most of these atheists who want religion probably grew up Protestant. So they're intrigued by the traditions and rigor of the Apostolic Churches, but their lingering feelings of ickiness towards Catholicism prevent them from considering it as an option.

Outside of 4chan it's far more common to see converts to Catholicism, even if Orthodoxy has indeed seen a small surge in recent years.

>>10250011
Perhaps it could be that they see an Orthodox liturgy and find tradition, then see a Catholic liturgy and find puppets, interpretive dance, clowns, women singing hippie songs on guitar, the Eucharist being treated like dirt, etc.

>>10250036
That's not really the point, is it? The point is, which is the One True Church? Both have had their errors over the years. Let's not start talking about iconoclasm, after all. But which is the church that Christ himself founded?

>>10250045
I thought the point was the tendency of people to look towards Orthodoxy, in which case liturgical abuse is most certainly relevant.

>>10250045
Perhaps he didn't found an institutional body.

>>10250045

You're acting like a woman. You said, in a passive-aggressive way, that the Orthodox are insincere. You can't deny that the latin church is a clown show (literally, in some cases), so you want to get esoteric. Be a man, don't cast snarky aspersions at other's sincerity. Find your own sincerity. Honestly, bitch-posting on /lit/ and you haven't even read DFW.

>>10249963
Why not rap?

Catholic and Orthodox Liturgy Compared

https://youtu.be/QxcOv4zPoVo

Only one conclusion can be drawn from this video.

>>10250109
I find both of them equally alienating, albeit in very different ways.

>>10249969
Orthodoxy is the religion of the "cool" people and kids

>>10250011
>>10250164

>>10250036
>Orthodox liturgy and find tradition,
You know the litergies they use were made three to four hundred years after Christs ministries neither Church has a claim to unchanged liturgy or service

>he calls himself a christian
>he hasn't read the third testament of God's (the absolute's) revelation
explain yourselves

>>10246458
>I have this notion that Catholicism perverted Christianity
You're probably American. America is a protestant country with protestant propaganda. Catholicism and Orthodoxy are both faithful continuations of Christianity as it was originally practiced.

>>10250182
I know; I think they're both bullshit. It's a common reaction, though.

>>10250204
After studying the issue for a while, I came to the conclusion that there isn't any body today which can truly claim to be a "faithful continuation." There are certain similarities which are found today in Orthodoxy and Catholicism, but some of those things appear to have had different emphases, operated in a different manner, or were aspects of certain political systems. Likewise there are aspects that seem closer to certain parts of Protestantism. But ultimately this type of endeavor is one of reconstruction more than comparison, and I think that trying to pin down a historical "true" Church is rather silly. There's no such thing.

>>10250204
Although great transgressions have taken place in the past, mind you, especially among the Renaissance Vatican.

>>10250238

kike

>>10250353
Great apologetics you've got there.

>>10246433
>Recommend me any relevant books I can read to further my understanding of the religion so I can make an informed decision on whether or not to really pursue this.

>The Catechism of the Catholic Church
It's a thick book, but it's well-organized and broken into smaller units and sub-units within chapters. I think the bishops and JPII did a first-rate job on this. It's something you can dip into for a few minutes, or an hour, or a week, and get a lot out of it.

>The Faith Explained by Leo Trese
A solid little book. I read it years ago. It's gone through many printings because it's good.

>Evangelical is Not Enough by Thomas Howard
A short introduction to practice of liturgy. Catholic liturgical forms originate in the ancient world; they are quite alien to modern sensibilities, but also quite profound and beautiful once one develops the eyes to see what is happening.

>The Catholic Catechism by Fr. John Hardon, SJ
Fr. Hardon wrote this prior to the new, official Catechism. It does not cover as much ground as the JPII catechism, but it is more expansive on certain important theological areas. It's very rich, very well done. Hardon was a top-notch theologian who loved the Church and devoted his life to it.

>The Spirit of Catholicism by Karl Adam
A very nice book by a fine theologian written in the 30s or 40s. Concise but thoughtful and illuminating. Maybe check it out via Amazon Look-inside-the-book, or equivalent, to see if it's your cup of tea. Would rec that for all these books, actually.

Moving from the general to the particular...

>The Seven-Storey Mountain by Thomas Merton
Classic conversion story. Merton was a gifted writer indeed.

>I Believe in Love: A Personal Retreat Based on the Teaching of St. Therese of Lisieux
I found this to be an inspired and moving presentation. Therese of Lisieux was a spiritual genius - the equivalent of Mozart in the spiritual realm, imho. This book presents her message with in a very attractive way. Absolutely penetrating on important subjects such as God's love for us, and our need to trust in God. I prefer the cover art on one of the older editions:
Link: https://www.amazon.com/Believe-Love-Retreat-Conferences-Interior/dp/0932506259

>Spiritual Journeys, Robert Baram, ed.
Conversion stories can be quite compelling and inspiring -- surprisingly so, if you've never read them before. I've read many such collections over the years, and this is one of the best.
Link: https://www.amazon.com/Spiritual-Journeys-Robert-Baram/dp/0819868760/

>Transformation in Christ by Dietrich von Hildebrand
"A penetrating analysis of the true path to holiness for those who love Christ. The first requisite is the person's desire for change, and with that fundamental attitude in mind, von Hildebrand devotes a chapter to each of the successive spiritual attitudes necessary for those who strive for Christian perfection."
Link: https://www.amazon.com/Transformation-Christ-Dietrich-Von-Hildebrand/dp/0898708699

>>10250389
>Catholic liturgical forms originate in the ancient world
More like the 1960s.

>>10250376

At least you're not so slimy you'll deny your heritage.

effing based

>>10250407
Does your local bishop approve of this type of behavior?

>>10250416

passive-aggressive tactics only work on jews and women.

>But do not be surprised that I called the Jews pitiable. They really are pitiable and miserable. When so many blessings from heaven came into their hands, they thrust them aside and were at great pains to reject them. The morning Sun of Justice arose for them, but they thrust aside its rays and still sit in darkness. We, who were nurtured by darkness, drew the light to ourselves and were freed from the gloom of their error.

Come home, shlomo.

>>10250463
Why are you calling me a Jew? Because I don't believe there is a historical "true Church"? That's a pretty common belief among Protestants. What you're saying doesn't even make sense.

>>10250467

typical jew gaslighting, saying something that's obviously false just to make me go through the effort of disproving it. typical tricks, shlomo.

>>10248813
Jews sure are violent with their take over the world religion.

>>10250489
Lol, okay buddy. Keep looking for that boogeyman.

>>10250504

Jews aren't boogeymen, don't be ridiculous. I have pity for jews and hope that they'll accept Christ. They're not my enemies. At the same time, I recognize that most are enemies of the Gospel.

>>10250086
I didn't cast aspersions at all Orthodox. Don't put words in my mouth. I called the average 4chan Orthobro insincere because that's precisely what they are, and I offered my theories as to why. The vast majority of so-called Christians here on 4chan are insincere, but I find the Orthobros the most insincere, because so much of it seems to come down to it "looking cool" or "feeling cool" rather than sincere devotion to Christ. They like the skulls and the robes and the beards but not the Eucharist and the Mass. They want the aesthetics without the faith. I detest these people. Christ will have something to say to them when they stand before him at the end of their lives. They should read the lives of the saints more closely.

>>10250537

How do you know all of that? Have they told you? Have you tracked them down? Have you deduced it from the way they phrase their posts?

What good does it do to question the sincerity of others?

>>10250537
>Post on an anime porn forum to call the faith of other posters insincere
What level of irony are we on?

>>10250554
Maybe it will do them good. Maybe it's a corrective on their part, something that will take their LARPing and turn it into a sincere faith. Sometimes it's not enough to offer a gentle correction. Sometimes one needs to be hard. Even Christ was hard at times.

>>10250561

Christ perfectly knows the heart of every man, you don't.

>>10250566
Then my words are unnecessary. But better to be unnecessary than necessary but undelivered.

>>10250537
>>10250561
>>10250570
Do you have any self-awareness of how fake and ridiculous you sound spouting shit like that on this website?

>>10250577
I'm entirely genuine. But if you think I'm faking, that's fine.

>>10250582
Lol, I'm sure you think you are.

>>10250577

>>10250109
The Greek liturgy is a part of the Catholic Church as well, but the Tridentine (and lucky for you Novus Ordo) are not.

>>10249795
It's basic and wrong exactly because it's about the non existing common basics, or rather basics that leave out too much to be called common.

What is central to Christianity is that it began as an insurgent movement, the Jews of ancient Palestine’s revolt against their Roman occupiers and those among the indigenous population who collaborated with them, most importantly the high priests of the Temple in Jerusalem. It is not meant to be a religion of consolation, but one that forces its adherents to be unapologetic partisans for those whom Jesus loved: the weak, the outcasts, the powerless, the poor, the disabled, the criminal. Jesus says as much when he tells us that he comes not to bring peace but the sword. A well managed slave plantation is peaceful, but struggles for justice are not. For a picture of the social foment that gave birth to Christianity, read Reza Aslan’s “Zealot”.

As for a book about how to live a Christian life, I would recommend Tolstoy’s “Resurrection.” When authors have some personal philosophy they want to push, the results are usually clunky and preachy. D.H. Lawrence’s novels after “The Rainbow” are guilty of this. But Tolstoy makes the compelling case that genuine social transformation is impossible through liberal reforms. Prince Nekhlyudov runs from pillar to post for hundreds of pages trying to redeem a sin committed in his youth, yet it is only in the last few paragraphs he realizes that truly, a man cannot have two masters, one must either serve the ossified societies of St. Petersburg and Moscow, societies that have lost all sense of conviction and have degenerated into hedonism or solipsism, or embrace the radical negation of this society by embracing the Gospels. It kinda speaks to our times as well, I reckon.

>>10250909
t. Someone who doesn't understand Christianity from the inside and takes his sources exclusively from non Christian authors on what Christianity is.

>>10250912
Aslan’s book is a popularization and synthesis of a lot of current biblical scholarship. Are you saying that a Muslim is somehow incapable of reading and interpreting the same texts as a Christian?

>>10250929
Not that anon but Aslans book isn't accurate and makes numerous theological and historical errors. Hes not a historian of a theologian and doesnt even try.

http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2013/08/09/3822264.htm

>>10250589
>>10250577

This is 4chan. Who the fuck do you think you are fooling? Trying to call someone out for being ridiculous and fake is as insipid as it gets.

>>10250929
There's a lot of bad biblical scholarship out there and he's certainly a populariser of it, but I was just as much referring to Tolstoy, a man who denied the validity of the Old Testament, Paul and divinity of Christ, for which he was excommunicated from the Church. I don't understand the insistence of non Christians to pass Tolstoy as one of ours. Especially because with at least the Russians there's a lot to chose from, Gogol, Dostoevsky, Soloviev, Solzenytsin and so on.

>>10246433

Rick James - Jesus Without Religion
C.S. Lewis - The Great Divorce
Soren Kierkegaard - The Sickness Unto Death
Dante Alighieri - The Divine Comedy
Dark Night of the Soul - St. John of the Cross

In order to understand Christianity, one must first understand that it's a spiritual movement to negate worldly cults, material passions, and mundane institutions for the wellbeing of spirit.

You are fortunate to be living in a period where one can combine elements from various scholars and mystics across hundreds of generations. Use it to your advantage to find a relationship with Christ that fulfills you while still glorifying God.

Specifically, in the last few decades, Christianity has seen a rising tide of believers who are irreligious. There are many who will call this heresy, but don't be pressured by what they say because we no longer live in an age that condemns this kind of negation with a brutal death.

This does not mean you should ostracize a community of believers. On the contrary, find believers that edify you in spirit and your pursuit of God. As I said, we are living in an age where plenty of Christians are walking outside of old boundaries to explore God without institutional pressures. People will tell you that Christianity is in decline, but I claim that this is the best age to be a Christian.

>>10246458
You will find an arguments about the issue almost anywhere you go on or off of the Internet. It's Christianity. We have been fighting with each other about what it means to be Christian for 2000 years.

>>10251020
Heretics are cool. That’s why.

Bumb

>>10246433
take the saved pill by converting to catholicism.

>>10251035
>C.S. Lewis - The Great Divorce

This is a nifty little book.

>>10246433
Look into the 7th Day adventists, they're the closest thing to the bible. Also eat healthy and don't drink.

>>10252866
tempted to do the same out of my distaste for left wingers and right wingers alike.

the only word that matters is the word of God, everyone else can go fuck themselves for thinking they matter. am i doing it right? never been religious in my life.

>>10255207
(Meaning that they gollow both the mind and spirit and charitu model, only denomination to do that)

>>10255214
Yes that's what the adventists say too, which is why they're the only christian denomination to hold the Sabbath

>>10246433
Bible: KJV, Douay-Rheims, Oxford International
Clarify: There is plenty of commentary literature from universally respected church fathers.

The Truth: All major sects of Christianity have fallen off the path of Christ and err under the leadership of devils.
The Catholic church no longer has a temporal head currently sitting on the See of Peter, if we accept the Second Vatican Council and Francis as Legitimate the Catholic church contradicts itself and is invalid.

God is the gives us the one and eternal truth, what was true during the time of Abraham was true during the time of David, was true during the time of Jesus Christ, and is true today. The truth will be true for all eternity until the end of the earth.
The idea that the Church can reveal a portion of this truth and clarify it as dogma and then later on change this dogma is illogical.

There is one Church and one path, if it isn't Sedevacantist Catholic Fundamentalism I do not believe there is a God.

>>10246433
OP, if you want to be a Christian you must above all follow those two commandments enumerated by Christ himself, namely, to love God (with heart and mind and strength and soul), and to love your neighbor even as yourself.

What the latter means is not to love your neighbor because of what you may gain by him, or what he might to in exchange for your love, but to love your neighbor IN God.

If you place conditions upon your love of God, or your love of others, you say, "I shall only love God IF such and such conditions are met." This means you do not love with your whole heart, and only love God and others insofar as they are a means to your own ends. This is not really love, you see?

To love with whole heart and mind and strength and soul, this is to know God's purity, and the purity of Christ; it is to know God's wisdom, and his wisdom delivered through Christ; it is to know God's power, the power which comes from perfect morality in speech and action; and finally it is to know God's grace, even as the grace which flows down into saints and devout followers of the Law.

This is the whole way, the beginning and the end. You must give this calling your whole life, your whole self, for this is the meaning of the commandments above. But do not fear this great task, for you are not meant to do more than that for which you have the strength. Being Christian is about learning to love God, and the more we love God, the sweeter is our soul.

It is the task of this life to be delivered unto God, and not to some vice which will never give us more than a moment's consolation in this life. The more you turn to God, the looser your chains to this world become, and the more you will see with loving eyes those people and things around you, because you see them impartially, without passion; you see them in God.