/lit/ - Literature

>>15935735
> 2. These outside mystics don't reach the same states as our Christian saints.

Here, it seems to me to be a totally arbitrary position (where everything external is rejected as Satanic a priori) and very unbelievable, since the descriptions of the states reached by the different mystics of the world corroborate each other mutually and independently of places, cultures, times.

>3. These paths may be more effective in leading to mystical union experiences, but this is not important.

Here I disagree, what saves is the personal relationship we have with God, in heaven we will have the beatific vision, not an exoteric rite. The mystical life being "the summit of the Christian life", the problem is serious.

This subject really obscures me, not a day goes by that I don't think about it, and it makes me greatly doubt the veracity of Christianity, which in my eyes cannot remain credible in its classical understanding without soteriological exclusivism. I am French and a former Guénonian, so this question has been bothering me for some time: I have read the different Catholic/Christian responses to this problem and to René Guénon in general, the pro-Guénon Christians (Borella) and the anti-Guénon Christians, and I still haven't found a convincing answer.

>>15935735
>>15935742
Thank you for this anon, don't have much to offer except a thank you. And a bump.

>>15935810

>>15935735
If everybody forgot about the Judaizing religions tomorrow, then there are two possibilities.
1. Nobody gets saved.
2. People still achieve salvation in the afterlife on the merit of their spiritual qualities rather than their identification with a specific form of worship
If 1 is true, then God is kind of a dickhead.
If 2 is true, then Christianity was never necessary to begin with.

>>15935855
>if
Anything is possible with "ifs", not relevant.

>>15935852
Bump.

>>15935735
Try bringing some practical psychology to it, I'm not saying reduce the mystical experience to psychology but I think someone like Jung would pretty much clear up the the worries.

>>15935865
Your entire religion is built on ifs.

>>15935875
Quite the opposite in my case: if mystical experiences are psychological, then the whole of classical Christianity collapses. Miracles and graces are external to our psyche. God is not our subconscious.

>>15935865
I think you missed the point brainlet. A relationship to a god prefaced on believing a specific myth is obviously flawed.

If the truth is said to only be discoverable by being born in the right culture so you can be indoctrinated, what you have isnt truth at all, but a cult.

>>15935901
That's why I said
> I'm not saying reduce the mystical experience to psychology
But you have to understand we're experiencing it psychologically.

>>15935883
No, my religion describes a reality. You can disbelieve it and adopt another metaphysical framework, but it is about starting from reality, not possibility.

>>15935910
Not him but the idea is that it's the absolute truth and other "cultures" have obviously come to similar conclusions or beliefs approaching it.

You dropped your fedora on the way out.

>>15935910
>is obviously flawed.
Affirmation without evidence

>If the truth is said to only be discoverable by being born in the right culture so you can be indoctrinated, what you have isnt truth at all, but a cult.
A question already dealt with by millenniums of theoligians

Go back to study

>brainlet

>>15935914
I just don't get it. If these experiences are psychological in nature, Christianity is collapsing. If they are not psychological in nature, the question of my thread arises. The fact that these experiences occur in a subject who has a psyche doesn't change anything, anon.

>>15935735
>that Christianity is the only door to salvation, and the most complete of doctrines
From an outsider's perspective, why can't this simply be false? I acknowledge the legitimacy of Christianity, but it seems to me almost all religions go through a process where the later followers add more and more dogmatism that weren't present in the prophet's own teachings. I believe Christianity not only has not been an exception, but it has been a particularly unfortunate case of this.

>>15935916
This is what scientologists think too, regardless of if the facts contradict that "reality". Most(not all) of the historic times myths on the bible would be cleared up if your cult got rid 9f the old testament, but it's still a cult

>>15935935
>From an outsider's perspective, why can't this simply be false
It may not be true, but then classical Christianity isn't true anymore. That's what I'm trying to find out.

>>15935932
>Affirmation without evidence
That's what your entire cult is built around. Truth and reality are independently discoverable without being in cults. Stay deluded little man.

>>15935943
This is not the subject of this thread, if you want to discuss the veracity or not of Christianity I invite you to open another thread.

>>15935954
>Stay deluded little man.

>>15935955
It is very much in context of the thread, you cant reconcile your beliefs with any degree of mental gymnastics because you cant reasonably justify them to begin with.

>>15935742
>since the descriptions of the states reached by the different mystics of the world corroborate each other mutually and independently of places, cultures, times
In a shallow sense, I suppose. But mystics, while perhaps sharing superficially similar experiences, walk away from those experiences with radically different messages.
If you were a king, and you received five different messengers claiming to be representatives of the same source, each bearing letters with opposing messages, you wouldn't say: "Aha! These messengers are one and the same, because they bear paper!" You'd say, "Wait, these guys look like messengers, but they each carry conflicting messages - four of them, or maybe even all five, must be imposters!" And then you might compare their messages with what you know to be true, to try and divine which letter comes from the real source and which letters are frauds.

>>15935967
>It is very much in context of the thread
No. My thread is about whether or not Christianity is compatible with the existence of outside mystics.

>>15935966
>this expression indicates confusion and lack of understanding
I'm not really an atheist, but my beliefs are my own. Sorry it angers you I dont LARP as a Jew.

>>15935972
What if it seems that the differences in the messages can be explained by the beliefs that everyone had before arriving at the same source, but that their description of the source itself is the same?

>>15935973
>Christianity is compatible with the existence of outside mystics
And it isnt, because if it were then Christianity would be unnecessary to begin with. What youd have is a God who cared more about you as a person than about what cult you belonged to.

>>15935977
>Sorry it angers you I dont LARP as a Jew.
Cringe, go back to /pol/.

>>15935989
I thought /pol/ was "a Christian board"
Pointing out you LARP as a Jew is not antisemitic. It's just a fact

>>15935985
A messenger who delivers his own message in place of the sender's would be a poor messenger, not to mention entirely untrustworthy.

Salvation is not in uttering a set properties about God.

Meme religion aside, pic related actually attempts to solve the problem
>resurrection and judgement don't occur immediately after death
>all spirits are allotted time to repent and/or learn about Christ if they didn't have the opportunity to do so on earth
>salvation is not seen as the result of a single trial in mortality
>salvation is a constant pursuit which extends past mortality
>those who gained testimony of Christ but didn't cultivate the necessary character for salvation can do so
>those who cultivated Christlike attributes but did not gain a testimony of Christ can do so as well
>even though universal truths can be learned in the afterlife, God still commands that everyone who understands them in this life must live by them

>>15935987
>And it isnt, because if it were then Christianity would be unnecessary to begin with. What youd have is a God who cared more about you as a person than about what cult you belonged to.
Please learn a little Catholic theology before you speak. It says that yes, God judges people first of all and not cults: that is why people can be saved outside the visible Church, because although they are non-Catholics out of ignorance their hearts are pure, they serve God and do good by conforming to the natural law laid down in their conscience. In this view of things, God has, out of mercy, planted seeds of truth in all religions, but Christianity is the complete way. Now, my question arises, please reread point 1.

>>15935932
It's always going to occur in a psyche anon, and therefore be psychological with mans definitions and limitations. It's not reducing it to psychology however. But just knowing the complexities of the mind should probably help you resolve some of these issues.

>>15936007
I'm not sure I understand. But the source we are talking about (God) is by essence supra-rational and ineffable, so it is normal that everyone reconstruct the experience afterwards with their own intellectual references.

>>15936008
Never said this.

>>15936009
A French Catholic theologian whom I like, defends a little bit the same thing, namely that everybody sees Jesus glorified at the hour of death and makes his choice with full knowledge of the causes.

>>15936011
>Please learn a little Catholic theology before you speak.
I know quite a bit about it, enough that my disgust toward its organization could not be expressed in any short terms.
>God judges people first of all and not cults:
That's really fucking funny given the fact that Catholics themselves are the most oblivious and hypocritical judges of European history. They killed people just for saying that there were other Universes.
>although they are non-Catholics out of ignorance their hearts are pure, they serve God and do good by conforming to the natural law laid down in their conscience
Again, if this were true then Christianity and its genocidal history is and was unnecessary. Why did it go to such great lengths to put Europeans in chains, enslave them, kill them, to stop practicing their native ethnic culture?
>Christianity is the complete way
Is it, though? Your own church itself is defined by historical corruption. It seems to me that the mystics were far more open minded and virtuous while paving the way toward humanities advancement. Religion that isn't objected to, but rather heightened by science.

>>15936041
>other Universes.
Galaxies, rather, just grabbing my coffee.

>>15936041
>muh crusade, muh genocide
Ok

>>15935855
>If 2 is true, then Christianity was never necessary to begin with.
people aren't set in stone, they need to be told wisdoms in order to change their way of being towards virtue, presumably the NT teaches things not as explicitly taught globally, by creating an organization that spreads "wisdom" (supposedly) it helps flawed individuals to fix their wrong ways. But yes, the NT is not necessary for everyone as it itself says >>15936008
The Question then is whether there are immoral teachings that then counteracts Christianity from within as a book of conscience.
Which is also true, and thus it cannot as a whole have been divinely inspired, this collapses the church's and bible's legitimacy. Protestants are retarded and thus the bible as a perfect whole has to be denied, and you're forced elsewhere. Wherever this perfectly moral sanctuary of the soul hides in the world.

>>15936041
>I know quite a bit about catholic theology
>Talks about history

Brainlet

>>15936052
I didn't even mention crusades. The enslavement of Europeans predates it. I know it is much to ask a deluded cult member to be historically literate and honest about his own shitty leaders.

>>15936060
>calls others brainlet
>doesn't know that in catholicism the papacy is the authoritive interpreter and enactor of theological doctrine
Get a load of this retard. Doesn't even understand the very principle of his own cringy cult.

>>15936063
>enslavement of Europeans predates it.
You mean, like the heathens used to do?

>>15936071
>believes that papal infallibility applies to the whole history of the Church
>Does not know the ex cathedra statements
Brainlet confirmed

>>15936073
>You mean, like the heathens used to do?
So your religion is just as valid and truthful in reforming people as all the supersititious pantheons they fought against.
Good one.
Way to prove your religion is not valid at all.

>>15936088
>Doesn't understand irony
Please get out

>>15936079
>This much apologetics to try and backpedal his way out of being revealed as historically retarded.
Papal authority was emphasized from the beginning, it is the entire basis of its schism with Eastern Orthodox - once his overreaching power was abused too far. Controlling Christianity was the entire purpose behind Romes conversion and the subsequent Councel of Nicaea.

Retard.

>>15936079
>holy spirit changes his mind

>>15936100
Now this is what I call irony.

>>15936029
>A French Catholic theologian whom I like
Name? And where does he say it?

>>15935735
How do you reconcile the fact that a dog sets a better example than your Canaanite sacrificial deity?
>dog is low maintenance and gushes unconditional love
>dog is straightforward, honest, faithful, loyal, and forgiving
>dog is seldom demanding, revengeful, jealous, angry, self-important, or into fear and dogma
>dog will never tell you to go to hell
>dog is happy to exist on your leftovers and eat your garbage
>dog gives unconditional love and forgiveness simply because you exist and meet basic superficial requirements
>dog delivers warm fuzzies -all- the time instead of only in relation to your needs, beliefs, and fears
>dog never generates internal pressures that would lead you to be hypocritical or self righteous - you can just be yourself
>dog will love you however you are
>even if you are not nice to dog and don't love it - it will still love and adore you above all others
>dogs love is widely spread, deeply sincere, and truly unconditional - a being actually worthy of your emulation

>>15936113
He's Belgian to be exact, he's Arnaud Dumouch.

>>15936121
Why do I always attract every brainlet on the board?

Someone to answer the question, and not derive on papal infallibility, church history, the validity of Christianity or whatever... ?

>>15936143
>Why do I always attract every brainlet on the board?
Considering you make retarded Christian threads, which attracts Christians; it would seem that your target audience and you yourself are brainlets.

>>15936157
This, joining a cult and expecting not to be surrounded by retards is a contradiction in terms.

>>15936157
>>15936162
Cringe

>>15936185
The lack of self awareness from you is overwhelming.

Now that the retards seem to be gone, any serious answers?

>>15936330
>the retards seem to be gone
Looks like you're still here

>>15936339
Fuck you're so cringe, get out already.

>>15936106
Kekked, and I'm a Catholic.

>>15936447
>projection

>>15935932
>A question already dealt with by millenniums of theoligians

Could you elaborate?

>>15936029
>I'm not sure I understand. But the source we are talking about (God) is by essence supra-rational and ineffable, so it is normal that everyone reconstruct the experience afterwards with their own intellectual references.
My point is that while the experiences themselves may be subjective, they contain objective revelatory statements, and those objective statements are contradictory between tradition. Someone is right, and someone is wrong, or everyone is wrong - but not everyone can be right.

>>15936585
*traditions

>>15935735
Break it down into four steps:
1)Religious doctrine
2)the path to mystical union
3)the actual mystical union
4)understanding of the mystical union ('the message' as the other anon put it)

'Steps' 1,2 and 4 differ for mystics outside Christianity. Step 3 can only ever affirm God's universality, the 'seeds of truth' in these other paths. The ease with which this union is achieved says nothing of its validity, or the validity of the path taken to achieve it. You need to cast aside this singular perspective. To use a blunt example - say a hindu priest achieves some kind of union with God, yet then goes on to use this experience to affirm the caste system, unchristian doctrines - does he not fail God? You might argue he was tempted or tested, in the end he failed God.

The importance and validity of step 3 lies in all other steps. Personally I think it IS harder to reach step 3 from a Christian doctrine than from others because that's what God intended. Faith is key.

The petty vindictive aura emanating from all the anti-Christian, ostensibly pagan posters ITT is enough to remove whatever doubt one may have of Christ and the existence of demonic forces.

>>15935742
>which in my eyes cannot remain credible in its classical understanding without soteriological exclusivism.

read rene girard

>>15937811
yes I feel the same, even though I still study and incorporate pagan elements in my personal theology, their hatred toward it is triggered by something else, since anyone understanding even superficially the metaphysical undertone of Christ and NT in general can see how it is not only a revealed religion but an incarnated revelation. anyway those people will either be driven by irrational influences (lesser demons) or resort to ignorance and sentimentalism

>>15936121
>jealousy
>bad
No

>>15935742
>makes me greatly doubt the veracity of Christianity, which in my eyes cannot remain credible in its classical understanding without soteriological exclusivism
That's a mouthful! Must be serious business, this religion stuff!

Question to believers of all faiths: that God never shows up, doesn't that raise suspicions? Imagine He doesn't exist. Everyone still goes to church, mosque, etc., they do human things, they read human books...would it look any different?

>>15936121
Imagine having absolutely no understanding of the numinous aspects of majestas and tremendum and taking their representative stages of numinous consciousness literally as an angry jealous bearded old man among clouds in the sky. And we are in a literature board.

>>15938287
Cringe.

>>15938278
He did show up tho, that's why people go to church.