Neocities.org
Thricegreat's Webpage
359,739 views
76 followers
6,734 updates
0 tips
>letslearntogether Your explanation about creatio ex nihilo sounds like Parmenides lol.
1 like
>daliwali Religion is not a means. That's literally an atheistic and materialistic worldview. Although each religion has its defects, there is definitely sacredness in it as god's energy. I think what we should do is pursuing Prisca Theologia.
1 like
daliwali
1 week ago
i think both are true, religion is a means to an end (power, influence, control) adopted by states. without adoption as state religion by romans, christianity would have died as an obscure cult. there may or may not be a kernel of truth, but most followers will never know.
1 like
>daliwali In Christianity, I think the fact that Jesus incarnated as a human automatically leads to a virtue ethics. If Jesus is god and just, his life was just so that he becomes a concept similar to Junzi in Confucianism. The ethical man.
1 like
>daliwali What I read recently were his short stories like "Two Old Men"... And NOPE. Becoming a Christ is not arbitrary at all and deification is a tradition since ancient times, even before Christianity. Dividing god and nature strictly is a western European nonsense, especially protestant. I just have realized that if Jesus was who god incarnated, deification should mean becoming Christ.
2 likes
daliwali
1 week ago
all of the holy men are but traditions. you can follow Christ if it helps you sleep at night... but few have the courage to stand alone, to not be a follower.
1 like
3 likes
letslearntogether
1 week ago
"Salvation As Becoming Christ"...Yes! I agree that "creatio ex nihilo" is nonsense because even "nothing" is a noun. But God is The Self-Created ONE and Christ is an emanation. Panentheism (transcendent + immanent) makes the most sense.
1 like
daliwali
1 week ago
being a Christ is hinted at in the title, "the kingdom of God is within you" by Tolstoy... the arbitrary goal of becoming a Christ is imposed by culture tho
1 like
Lol! Not Anaximander or Anaxagoras?...Reading the conversation between you and daliwali is quite enjoyable. I generally agree that "noumena" are irreducible in expression (e.g.: GΓΆdel's incompleteness theorems), but can be experienced (i.e.: that's what "gnosis" is). These "archetypal forms" are the foundation of the "Prisca Theologia"/"Primordial Tradition"/"Perennial Philosophy"/etc.
In other words, they are what all individual expressions hold in common and reasoning can point to them. One of the clearest descriptions of how humans connect to this process that I've seen is from Miriam Joseph's Trivium. I would type it out here, but the quote won't fit, so I'll post it with some extra notes on its own temporary webpage: https://letslearntogether.neocities.org/bookclub/quote01