Christianity is similar to Plato's theory of forms. The names are irrelevant because of the limitations of human linguistics, nothing in this world could accurately describe or portray the divine. The symbolism is what is important. So, Zeus is a dude in a cloud like God. The archetype is the same and manifests in a different form. It's all simply "the Good" or lack thereof. Not "this God, that God, and those Gods". For example, maybe there's a religion on a remote island with a lone tribe. We'd celebrate the elements of Christianity they have within their religion as God reaching these people in terms they understand. It doesn't matter at all what they call these concepts.
Or you, whatever you believe. I would celebrate that too, provided it doesn't violate any moral lines in the sand that I have. I celebrate Eastern philosophies like Taoism and Confucianism, because of the elements I believe to be inspired by God. It's not my place to judge how people come to understand God, or his walk with them.
Maybe some people profess themselves to be Muslims, but in actuality live more Christian lives than most Christians. I believe that God reaches to people regardless of their beliefs and tries to show them His light in terms they will understand. Which is unique to each individual. Like if everyone is standing around a tree. We all see the same tree but from different perspectives. The way a parent loves their newborn, or the way people sacrifice themselves for the ones they love.
But that's different from entirely rejecting the notion of "the good" as a concept, in lieu of worshipping a rock or a tree or science or one's self or something else. Leftists worship genitalia and power over others. Those are all false idols, because they are fleeting, temporary, and ultimately meaningless.
Yes thank you. The problem with Christianity is that while it exemplifies the good, it has been turned into a franchise, more so than other religions, although I see that all Abrahamic religions are franchises, especially the jews. Christianity pursued realpolitik when it entered into a cartel with the old norse kings, in England and Scandinavia, with Blue Beard etc, in the 800s, 900s. It offered to give them the blessing of God, which the Christian bishops presumably held. And from there on it marched onward, always attached at the navel with jews, because it was hungry for money, hungry to maintain the appearances of godliness, to build cathedrals, to horde and gate-keep knowledge, to extract rent and enslave. The tyrannical powers that assert themselves currently are exactly those same powers, it's is not the jews only, the couldn't do it without the Christian church leaders, and aristocracy/nobility, which overtly hate the jews also, but are dependent on them. Through altruism and the helper cult, we are set up for defeat. All the while, the jews and curia have done the opposite, and profited from this, and kept us at bay.
Sorry this got lengthy but it's packed full of good information, if you're interested. If you don't care for the history just skip to the last few paragraphs.
I do agree that the Roman Catholic Church turned the religion into more of a hustle. It wasn't always this way though. The Bishops all had equal say in the conduct of the Church, eventually the Bishop of Rome declared himself king, essentially. This resulted in the great schism. The patriarch of Rome then said "we didn't break away from the Church, the other five patriarchs broke away from us". The Orthodox Roman Empire (Eastern Orthodox Empire) became the most powerful and prosperous empire in human history, and this made the West (Roman Catholics) very envious.
Then when the crusades happened, the Roman Catholic Church initially helped the Orthodox Roman Empire, but when they saw the East was weakened by the Muslims, they betrayed them and attacked them to seize power in the fourth crusade. They then aggressively began expanding their own Churches into the Eastern Empire. Eventually, little by little, they did their best to erase the East completely and finally obtain complete control of Europe.
Most people do not even know what Eastern Orthodox Christianity is, despite them being one of the largest, longest lasting, and most prosperous empires in human history. Despite them being the closest to the original church to this day, while the Catholics change their religion by Papal decree every 50-100 years.
The Catholics believe that if you are not part of their Church you automatically go to hell. The Orthodox do not. The Catholics transformed their religion into a form of legalism, where you say X amount of prayers, attend on Sundays, pay your 10%, you go somewhere super special after you die. The Orthodox do not.
They transformed it into a system of legalism, whereas the Orthodox is a system of mysticism. Heaven and hell aren't places you go when you die, they are states of mind. The goal is to awaken to these divine realities. It's the same place, it's just perceived differently. The same way you can have two people in the same house or at the same job, one is perfectly happy and healthy and the other is maybe, suicidal, addicted to drugs. They are both experiencing the same place physically but mentally and spiritually they experience bliss, happiness, or anguish and torment. Someone who understands the true nature of reality can be happy no matter how poor or dire their circumstances, because they only have one foot in this world and one foot in the other. I've met many people like this, they have an aura about them that's instantly recognizable. The goal of this life, we are made in the image of God and strive to obtain his likeness. Once someone has both the image and likeness of God, he becomes something similar to a demi-God. It's not about indulgences, saying 20 hail Mary's, and following the rules. It's about awakening to reality. All of these "rules" are just instructions that will help you awaken to the true world. I have seen it myself, and the more I sinned the more I blinded myself from seeing the divine and experiencing His overwhelming love and affection. That's what it means to be blind deaf and dumb.
Modern day Christians consider all of these teachings blasphemous. Because even the protestants have roots in the Roman Catholic Church. But this is what has been taught since the beginning. The teachings have been completely corrupted and it's arguably not even Christianity at this point.
I grew up catholic. The abbot was automatically Godfather to all the first-born sons. This mattered still up to perhaps 2 generations ago. The first-born son was going to join the priesthood, as was the youngest son. Women were enslaved if they found no husband, or had children out of wedlock, or were an orphan themselves. It was a cruel and oppressive system for the most part, however, it still offered advancement. My grandpa mostly hated the clerics. He saw through the scheme. It is a scheme of oppression, and the mechanism is the same as it is today: Racism=original sin, guilt; Climate change and carbon credits=absolution. Curia calls pointing this out blasphemous, because it that their legitimization is a concocted one, a figment. They don't like that, just like the jews don't like it when you reveal what they do, and how they justify such.
The queen of England operates in this same fashion, only, in addition to being enslaved, she has no problem letting her subjects perish. I don't know much about the Eastern Church, so I appreciate your elaborate response.
My upbringing focused too much on the negative, the vice (sin everywhere you look, and you are born bad, and you are bad, bad, bad). Whereas if it focused on the positive, the virtue, I think my childhood would have been much happier.
Here is a list of platonic virtues, and listed alongside christian ones. https://pic8.co/sh/ZmBKmo.png
(post is archived)