Author Topic: Is there an Orthodox assessment/critique of Augustine's City of God?  (Read 8245 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,419
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
I don't think St. Augustine has a poor view of God, but rather a poor view of humanity.
Good remark.

Believe me, we deserve most of the disparagement we get, from any source. Humanity is monstrous. Humanity is also fairly useless. Humanity requires a Savior.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Rohzek

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,013
I don't think St. Augustine has a poor view of God, but rather a poor view of humanity.
Good remark.

Believe me, we deserve most of the disparagement we get, from any source. Humanity is monstrous. Humanity is also fairly useless. Humanity requires a Savior.

Actually, we don't deserve Augustine's crazy and outright irrational disparagement.

I don't think anyone said humanity doesn't need a savior. It's a point of fact, however, that Augustine professed humanity to be totally depraved. John Calvin more or less got him right. And so did Gottschalk of Orbais. This point of view was declared a heresy as the Council of Jerusalem in 1672.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2017, 07:36:24 PM by Rohzek »
"Il ne faut imaginer Dieu ni trop bon, ni méchant. La justice est entre l'excès de la clémence et la cruauté, ainsi que les peines finies sont entre l'impunité et les peines éternelles." - Denise Diderot, Pensées philosophiques 1746

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
Let me then say something about Augustine and the City of God. I read some 100 pages of this work today and yesterday and must say I lost almost all respect I had for him before. Origen was certainly a far more gifted Christian philosopher and certainly morally superior to Augustine. Augustine seems like a vengeful and troubled man filled with hatred towards life who was exceptionally afraid of suffering in this life and therefore wanted to flee to the next. A coward to put it simply. And a heretic. He was without a doubt calvinistic. Calvin interpreted him correctly it seems too, since Augustine even speaks of people being predestined to damnation in this relatively ungifted work(compared to his confessions)

Even if it weren't a Saint you were reacting to, that level of hatred toward someone in that much detail after less than two days of approaching their work can't be healthy. Maybe you need to cut down on your sugar intake.
I feel no hatred towards Augustine. I am certain he still was a godly man. I believe the hatred he has expressed in this book of his far surpasses my disdain and disgust towards the actual hatred that he expresses.
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
Augustine seems like a vengeful and troubled man filled with hatred towards life who was exceptionally afraid of suffering in this life and therefore wanted to flee to the next. A coward to put it simply. And a heretic.

The absolute nothingness of death would be a blessing. Something to look forward to.
Well, it would be a better thing still to face the suffering here in this life, which I believe Christ showed us is the way of life, than to wish to flee to an afterlife where you are saved yourself FROM the world without any hope for the salvation OF the world, right? Of course the nothingness of death would be a blessing compared to what Augustine promises the majority of mankind: Eternal torment in hell with literal fire predetermined and created by God before the foundation of the world independent from our actions, long before our birth which we didn't even choose. I wouldnt want to be in that hell. Nor would I woant to be in heaven with the God who created that hell for the destruction of sinners for his own glory decided by him before the creation of the world. It seems like Augustine continued to be a follower in many ways of manicheism after all.
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
I don't think St. Augustine has a poor view of God, but rather a poor view of humanity.
Good remark.

Believe me, we deserve most of the disparagement we get, from any source. Humanity is monstrous. Humanity is also fairly useless. Humanity requires a Savior.
I agree that humanity needs a savior. I too agree about that we to a certain extent deserve the disparagement we get, but man becomes an even more monstrous being if his God is monstrous, which the God of Calvin for example is. And the type of sentiments expressed by Augustine are proofs that man deserves disparagement, if you know what I mean. Because the ultimate result of this kind of rational way of theologizing is that the Only one who deserves disparagement is God, and that CANT be right. Humanity is not completely useless though, at least not in the eyes of God. He is both useless in a sense, but also the greatest crown of the creation. And man isn't only monstrous. We have created wonderful things that in many ways justify our existence too, like the music of Beethoven and Bach, the literature of Dostoevsky and Cervantes, the art of van Gogh and da Vinci...
« Last Edit: June 09, 2017, 11:01:51 AM by beebert »
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,106
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Augustine seems like a vengeful and troubled man filled with hatred towards life who was exceptionally afraid of suffering in this life and therefore wanted to flee to the next. A coward to put it simply. And a heretic.

The absolute nothingness of death would be a blessing. Something to look forward to.
Well, it would be a better thing still to face the suffering here in this life, which I believe Christ showed us is the way of life, than to wish to flee to an afterlife where you are saved yourself FROM the world without any hope for the salvation OF the world, right? Of course the nothingness of death would be a blessing compared to what Augustine promises the majority of mankind: Eternal torment in hell with literal fire predetermined and created by God before the foundation of the world independent from our actions, long before our birth which we didn't even choose. I wouldnt want to be in that hell. Nor would I woant to be in heaven with the God who created that hell for the destruction of sinners for his own glory decided by him before the creation of the world. It seems like Augustine continued to be a follower in many ways of manicheism after all.

I just think you're a lot like the people you repudiate. 
Please don't project meta-debates onto me.

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
Augustine seems like a vengeful and troubled man filled with hatred towards life who was exceptionally afraid of suffering in this life and therefore wanted to flee to the next. A coward to put it simply. And a heretic.

The absolute nothingness of death would be a blessing. Something to look forward to.
Well, it would be a better thing still to face the suffering here in this life, which I believe Christ showed us is the way of life, than to wish to flee to an afterlife where you are saved yourself FROM the world without any hope for the salvation OF the world, right? Of course the nothingness of death would be a blessing compared to what Augustine promises the majority of mankind: Eternal torment in hell with literal fire predetermined and created by God before the foundation of the world independent from our actions, long before our birth which we didn't even choose. I wouldnt want to be in that hell. Nor would I woant to be in heaven with the God who created that hell for the destruction of sinners for his own glory decided by him before the creation of the world. It seems like Augustine continued to be a follower in many ways of manicheism after all.

I just think you're a lot like the people you repudiate.
I need to keep my enemies Close. And the greatest one is myself ;) I think you have a point. The ideas of Calvin and Augustine can be felt within me. Close to me. But nothing within me is more repusive to me. I see it as a task to overcome this. And to overcome Calvin and Augustine. And to do that would be a great victory. Without a doubt, Nietzsche had a Point when he said that man is something that must be overcome. And more specifically, man must overcome himself. I dont find God in the predestinarian systems of thought. I find a denial of God. An objectified God limited because of rational thought. Not omniscience and omnipotence, but human ideas of the concepts. The result is a slave morality, which is the opposite of what I believe to be authentic christianity. Only orthodox theology can defend God from modern western objections to the rationalized idea of God. Orthodoxy needs to be more proclaimed in the world! And the monstrous ideas of the west (except a few of them) needs to be eliminated.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2017, 11:38:38 AM by beebert »
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline recent convert

  • Orthodox Chrisitan
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,159
  • St.David of Wales pray for us
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
   From what I understand, St. Augustine tried hard to be consciencious in his faith. It seems like many hardened, often unforgiving, tendencies emerged from Carthage. It seems like these can be traced, in a psychological sense, from Tertullian, Donatism, Novatianism etc. ?Just my casual, vague observation.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2017, 11:55:35 AM by recent convert »
Antiochian OC NA

Beware the wrath of the guardians of "love."

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
   From what I understand, St. Augustine tried hard to be consciencious in his faith. It seems like many hardened, often unforgiving, tendencies emerged from Carthage. It seems like these can be traced, in a psychological sense, from Tertullian, Donatism, Novatianism etc. ?Just my casual, vague observation.
I agree.
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Online Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 36,137
This seems relevant here. When faced with the possibility that some Church Fathers like Augustine, Ambrose and Jerome might have taught the filioque doctrine, St. Photius answered this in various ways. Here was one of his arguments:

Quote
It is possible to find many other examples in our holy and blessed fathers. I have in mind Clement, one of the bishops of [Old] Rome. Consider the books which are known from him as Clementine (I do not say write because, according to ancient report, Peter the Coryphaeus commanded they be written). Consider also Dionysius of Alexandria, who in stretching out his hand against Sabellius nearly joins with Arius. Consider also the splendour of the sacred-martyr, Methodius the Great of Patara, who did not reject the idea that angels fell into mortal desire and bodily intercourse, even though they are incorporeal and without passions. I shall pass over Pantaenos, Clement, Pierios, Pamphilos and Theognostos, all holy men and teachers of holy disciples whom we hymn with great honour and affection, especially Pamphilos and Pierios, distinguished by the trials of martyrdom.

Although we do not accept all of their statements, we grant them honour for their patient disposition and goodness of life and for their other doctrines. In addition to those previously mentioned, there is Irenaeus, the bishop of God, who received the supervision of sacred things in Lyons and also Hippolytus, his disciple, the Episcopal martyr: all of these were admirable in many ways, though at times some of their writings do not avoid departing from orthodoxy

-- St. Photius the Great, Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit, 75

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
I by the way am almost certain that election means something else than predestined to be "saved" as Augustine taught.  Many are called, but few are chosen. Who are the elect? Throughout the Bible the term "the elect" is used to refer to "God's chosen people". But chosen to what? Chosen to be the light and salt in the world. Salt saves meat. The elect work with and by the Grace of the Holy Spirit to save the whole world. Salt preserves something else. Light illuminates something else. Israel, the Old Testament type of the Church (or even the Church of the Old Testament), was called God's elect so as to be a light to the gentiles. "Through you," God says to Abraham, "all the the nations of the earth will be blessed". This must be the spirit of the Christian. Not "I am elect, you are damned". We are all one in Adam. So christians are obligated to strive sSalt preserves something else. Light illuminates something else. Israel, the Old Testament type of the Church (or even the Church of the Old Testament), was called God's elect so as to be a light to the gentiles. "Through you," God says to Abraham, "all the the nations of the earth will be blessed." That should be the christians spirit. We are all one in Adam. Christians should be obligated not to seperate themselves from the children of Adam, but to show the light of Christ to the children of Adam to strive to make all men children of Christ. For the salvation of the world. There is no fear in love. Christians are called to show People the light of immortality and Victory over death, and to answer to evil with good. To not resist evil.
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
The notion that the salvation of Jesus is a salvation from the punishment of our sins, is a false and pathetic idea coming from the herd mind.. The salvation of Christ is salvation from the will and leaning to sin. It is a deliverance into God's ways of thinking and feeling. It is a salvation that makes the heart pure, with the will and choice of the heart to be pure. To such a heart, sin is disgusting. It sees a thing as it is,  just as God sees everything as it is. The soul thus saved would rather sink into the flames of hell than steal into heaven and be there under the shadow of an imputed righteousness. What a fakse view of the gospel that has derived from the reformed theology! What a blasphemy towards love, goodness and truth! No soul is saved that would not prefer hell to sin. No heavenly utilitarist can remain that way and call him self saved and chosen. Jesus did not die to save us from punishment; he was called Jesus because he should save his people from their sins. About rationalistic theology: Let the dead bury their dead, but I will what I can to keep them from burying the living.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2017, 02:00:51 PM by beebert »
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,419
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Let me then say something about Augustine and the City of God. I read some 100 pages of this work today and yesterday and must say I lost almost all respect I had for him before. Origen was certainly a far more gifted Christian philosopher and certainly morally superior to Augustine. Augustine seems like a vengeful and troubled man filled with hatred towards life who was exceptionally afraid of suffering in this life and therefore wanted to flee to the next. A coward to put it simply. And a heretic. He was without a doubt calvinistic. Calvin interpreted him correctly it seems too, since Augustine even speaks of people being predestined to damnation in this relatively ungifted work(compared to his confessions)

Even if it weren't a Saint you were reacting to, that level of hatred toward someone in that much detail after less than two days of approaching their work can't be healthy. Maybe you need to cut down on your sugar intake.
I feel no hatred towards Augustine. I am certain he still was a godly man. I believe the hatred he has expressed in this book of his far surpasses my disdain and disgust towards the actual hatred that he expresses.

It's just so humorous that you took less than two days to become a disdainful expert on one of the greatest and most complex books in the world. You did know it's among the most important philosophical works of antiquity, being one of the major responses to Plato's Republic (the other being Cicero's)?
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
Let me then say something about Augustine and the City of God. I read some 100 pages of this work today and yesterday and must say I lost almost all respect I had for him before. Origen was certainly a far more gifted Christian philosopher and certainly morally superior to Augustine. Augustine seems like a vengeful and troubled man filled with hatred towards life who was exceptionally afraid of suffering in this life and therefore wanted to flee to the next. A coward to put it simply. And a heretic. He was without a doubt calvinistic. Calvin interpreted him correctly it seems too, since Augustine even speaks of people being predestined to damnation in this relatively ungifted work(compared to his confessions)

Even if it weren't a Saint you were reacting to, that level of hatred toward someone in that much detail after less than two days of approaching their work can't be healthy. Maybe you need to cut down on your sugar intake.
I feel no hatred towards Augustine. I am certain he still was a godly man. I believe the hatred he has expressed in this book of his far surpasses my disdain and disgust towards the actual hatred that he expresses.

It's just so humorous that you took less than two days to become a disdainful expert on one of the greatest and most complex books in the world. You did know it's among the most important philosophical works of antiquity, being one of the major responses to Plato's Republic (the other being Cicero's)?
Of Course I do know that. I dont have the complete work. I Only have book 19-27 which are the Only Ones that I have found translated Into my language. As a philosophical work by the way, from what I have read, the Republic by Plato seems far superior.
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,419
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Well, yes, of course, the Republic is the seminal work. You aren't a native English speaker?
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
Well, yes, of course, the Republic is the seminal work. You aren't a native English speaker?
No I am from Sweden :)
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,419
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
You have a shockingly good grasp of written English.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
You have a shockingly good grasp of written English.
Thanks. I guess the reason might be that I have read a lot of books in english.
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline christiane777

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 342
  • and drinketh water of the raine of heauen
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: God
Is there an Orthodox assessment/critique of Augustine's City of God?

I liked a lot of it.  As I recall, it can be a little on the dry side, very long book, bit tedious in parts.  But I can't think of anything in it that an Orthodox would have too much problem with.  Basic Christian stuff.  Should be read more than it is.  Worth the effort in my opinion.
I was in the spirit on the Lords day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,419
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
A lot of times it's a good idea to learn what contemporary polemic a writer's own polemic was directed at, as the hyperbole on both sides tends to cancel each other out, allowing us to concentrate on what was actually new and important in the writer's work. In St. Augustine's case in this famous book, he was hitting back at the growing narrative in the empire that paganism had a philosophical and moral basis for civilization and Christianity didn't -- that it was Christianity that was ruining the West and handing the empire to her enemies. So first the writer vociferously attacks his foes in an effort to neutralize their growing prestige through sheer dazzling rhetoric. For myself, I spend little time on this portion of the book. However, then he follows up by building an extraordinary substantive vision of a Christian civilization the equal or superior of the most famous of such visions built by pagans, viz. Plato and Cicero. This portion of the book deserves very careful reading. St. Augustine was a stunning intellectual, especially for his rather fallen place and time. He was also incredibly prolific. Some points of comparison to Origen or Luther come to mind.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,106
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
I like the part where he talks about how some people can fart musically. 
Please don't project meta-debates onto me.

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline MalpanaGiwargis

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 448
  • Māran etraḥam 'lay!
I'm not Orthodox, but my assessment is that City of God XVI.8-9 is awesome for the discussion of monsters and people with backwards feet.
Woe is me, that I have read the commandments,
   and have become learned in the Scriptures,
and have been instructed in Your glories,
   and yet I have become occupied in shameful things!

(Giwargis Warda, On Compunction of Soul)

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,419
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
I'm not Orthodox, but my assessment is that City of God XVI.8-9 is awesome for the discussion of monsters and people with backwards feet.

"Wherefore, to conclude this question cautiously and guardedly [how Christianity can explain monsters], either these things which have been told of some races have no existence at all; or if they do exist, they are not human races; or if they are human, they are descended from Adam." Seems he covered all his bases.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline scamandrius

  • A man of many, many turns
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,195
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: DOWAMA of AANA
I don't think St. Augustine has a poor view of God, but rather a poor view of humanity.
Good remark.

Believe me, we deserve most of the disparagement we get, from any source. Humanity is monstrous. Humanity is also fairly useless. Humanity requires a Savior.

Actually, we don't deserve Augustine's crazy and outright irrational disparagement.

I don't think anyone said humanity doesn't need a savior. It's a point of fact, however, that Augustine professed humanity to be totally depraved. John Calvin more or less got him right. And so did Gottschalk of Orbais. This point of view was declared a heresy as the Council of Jerusalem in 1672.

No, he didn't. He never did.  You're committing the same error that Fr. John Romanides (of blessed memory) and Rev. Dr. Michael Azkoul do when assessing Augustine.  You assume that because John Calvin taught that mankind was utterly and totally depraved (fact, he did) and that Augustine was one of his influences (fact, he was) that Augustine taught the very same thing (falsehood, he didn't).  The reformers like Calvin, Luther and Zwingli, among others, were always trying to think that the church fathers were "on their side."  And St. Augustine was the church father, par excellence to  appeal to.  Augustine's antropology was nowhere near as developed as what we read in Irenaeus, but to impose onto Augustine all the errors of the Reformation is sheer laziness and rooted in a hatred of sorts.  We all like scapegoats  (it's easy) and Augustine has become the scapegoat for which every heresy in Catholicism, the Reformation and even in new theological fads can be traced to.  Augustine never taught anything about utter depravity and the times that he is cited to support that he did are rooted in clever sophistry and assumption. Don't read the critics of Augustine. Read Augustine.  And for this whole thing about total depravity, I would encourage you to read his Anti-Pelagian writings particularly On the Spirt and the Letter. It 's very short.  You can probably find it somewhere on line in the Post-Nicene Fathers collection.
Da quod iubes et iube quod vis.

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
I don't think St. Augustine has a poor view of God, but rather a poor view of humanity.
Good remark.

Believe me, we deserve most of the disparagement we get, from any source. Humanity is monstrous. Humanity is also fairly useless. Humanity requires a Savior.

Actually, we don't deserve Augustine's crazy and outright irrational disparagement.

I don't think anyone said humanity doesn't need a savior. It's a point of fact, however, that Augustine professed humanity to be totally depraved. John Calvin more or less got him right. And so did Gottschalk of Orbais. This point of view was declared a heresy as the Council of Jerusalem in 1672.

No, he didn't. He never did.  You're committing the same error that Fr. John Romanides (of blessed memory) and Rev. Dr. Michael Azkoul do when assessing Augustine.  You assume that because John Calvin taught that mankind was utterly and totally depraved (fact, he did) and that Augustine was one of his influences (fact, he was) that Augustine taught the very same thing (falsehood, he didn't).  The reformers like Calvin, Luther and Zwingli, among others, were always trying to think that the church fathers were "on their side."  And St. Augustine was the church father, par excellence to  appeal to.  Augustine's antropology was nowhere near as developed as what we read in Irenaeus, but to impose onto Augustine all the errors of the Reformation is sheer laziness and rooted in a hatred of sorts.  We all like scapegoats  (it's easy) and Augustine has become the scapegoat for which every heresy in Catholicism, the Reformation and even in new theological fads can be traced to.  Augustine never taught anything about utter depravity and the times that he is cited to support that he did are rooted in clever sophistry and assumption. Don't read the critics of Augustine. Read Augustine.  And for this whole thing about total depravity, I would encourage you to read his Anti-Pelagian writings particularly On the Spirt and the Letter. It 's very short.  You can probably find it somewhere on line in the Post-Nicene Fathers collection.
I have read Augustine. I have read On Grace and Free will, Confessions, and big parts of the City of God. He was, from what I have read, without a doubt close to Calvin in his views. Double predestination is the inevitable conclusion of his thought. Calvin was the one who in his theology of predestination was closest to Augustine and who interpreted Augustine most correctly there. And unfortunately, it is hard to not draw the conclusion of total depravity if you believe in double predestination it seems to me... I might be wrong though. Then of course, the personality of the God of Calvin is quite different. Augustine still believed (how though I am not sure) in a God of love, and he certainly had a relationship with this loving God. Calvin seems to me to have no more than an idea of God. And his God has only love for the elect, and everything is about his own self-gloryfication. The opposite of the cross. Ergo, the opposite of christianity.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2017, 03:12:38 AM by beebert »
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,419
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
I don't think St. Augustine has a poor view of God, but rather a poor view of humanity.
Good remark.

Believe me, we deserve most of the disparagement we get, from any source. Humanity is monstrous. Humanity is also fairly useless. Humanity requires a Savior.

Actually, we don't deserve Augustine's crazy and outright irrational disparagement.

I don't think anyone said humanity doesn't need a savior. It's a point of fact, however, that Augustine professed humanity to be totally depraved. John Calvin more or less got him right. And so did Gottschalk of Orbais. This point of view was declared a heresy as the Council of Jerusalem in 1672.

No, he didn't. He never did.  You're committing the same error that Fr. John Romanides (of blessed memory) and Rev. Dr. Michael Azkoul do when assessing Augustine.  You assume that because John Calvin taught that mankind was utterly and totally depraved (fact, he did) and that Augustine was one of his influences (fact, he was) that Augustine taught the very same thing (falsehood, he didn't).  The reformers like Calvin, Luther and Zwingli, among others, were always trying to think that the church fathers were "on their side."  And St. Augustine was the church father, par excellence to  appeal to.  Augustine's antropology was nowhere near as developed as what we read in Irenaeus, but to impose onto Augustine all the errors of the Reformation is sheer laziness and rooted in a hatred of sorts.  We all like scapegoats  (it's easy) and Augustine has become the scapegoat for which every heresy in Catholicism, the Reformation and even in new theological fads can be traced to.  Augustine never taught anything about utter depravity and the times that he is cited to support that he did are rooted in clever sophistry and assumption. Don't read the critics of Augustine. Read Augustine.  And for this whole thing about total depravity, I would encourage you to read his Anti-Pelagian writings particularly On the Spirt and the Letter. It 's very short.  You can probably find it somewhere on line in the Post-Nicene Fathers collection.
I have read Augustine. I have read On Grace and Free will, Confessions, and big parts of the City of God. He was, from what I have read, without a doubt close to Calvin in his views. Double predestination is the inevitable conclusion of his thought. Calvin was the one who in his theology of predestination was closest to Augustine . Then of course, the personality of the God of Calvin is quite different. Augustine still believed (how though I am not sure) in a God of love, and he certainly had a relationship with this loving God. Calvin seems to me to have no more than an idea of God. And his God has only love for the elect, and everything is about his own self-gloryfication. The opposite of the cross. Ergo, the opposite of christianity.

You read him for less than two days. Surely it's sheer hubris to think one grasps one of the foremost thinkers of the world in a matter of hours. Also, St. Augustine wrote thousands of pages throughout his life: most isn't even translated. In sum, I don't know if anybody living is a true expert on St. Augustine, but it surely isn't I or you.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
I don't think St. Augustine has a poor view of God, but rather a poor view of humanity.
Good remark.

Believe me, we deserve most of the disparagement we get, from any source. Humanity is monstrous. Humanity is also fairly useless. Humanity requires a Savior.

Actually, we don't deserve Augustine's crazy and outright irrational disparagement.

I don't think anyone said humanity doesn't need a savior. It's a point of fact, however, that Augustine professed humanity to be totally depraved. John Calvin more or less got him right. And so did Gottschalk of Orbais. This point of view was declared a heresy as the Council of Jerusalem in 1672.

No, he didn't. He never did.  You're committing the same error that Fr. John Romanides (of blessed memory) and Rev. Dr. Michael Azkoul do when assessing Augustine.  You assume that because John Calvin taught that mankind was utterly and totally depraved (fact, he did) and that Augustine was one of his influences (fact, he was) that Augustine taught the very same thing (falsehood, he didn't).  The reformers like Calvin, Luther and Zwingli, among others, were always trying to think that the church fathers were "on their side."  And St. Augustine was the church father, par excellence to  appeal to.  Augustine's antropology was nowhere near as developed as what we read in Irenaeus, but to impose onto Augustine all the errors of the Reformation is sheer laziness and rooted in a hatred of sorts.  We all like scapegoats  (it's easy) and Augustine has become the scapegoat for which every heresy in Catholicism, the Reformation and even in new theological fads can be traced to.  Augustine never taught anything about utter depravity and the times that he is cited to support that he did are rooted in clever sophistry and assumption. Don't read the critics of Augustine. Read Augustine.  And for this whole thing about total depravity, I would encourage you to read his Anti-Pelagian writings particularly On the Spirt and the Letter. It 's very short.  You can probably find it somewhere on line in the Post-Nicene Fathers collection.
I have read Augustine. I have read On Grace and Free will, Confessions, and big parts of the City of God. He was, from what I have read, without a doubt close to Calvin in his views. Double predestination is the inevitable conclusion of his thought. Calvin was the one who in his theology of predestination was closest to Augustine . Then of course, the personality of the God of Calvin is quite different. Augustine still believed (how though I am not sure) in a God of love, and he certainly had a relationship with this loving God. Calvin seems to me to have no more than an idea of God. And his God has only love for the elect, and everything is about his own self-gloryfication. The opposite of the cross. Ergo, the opposite of christianity.

You read him for less than two days. Surely it's sheer hubris to think one grasps one of the foremost thinkers of the world in a matter of hours. Also, St. Augustine wrote thousands of pages throughout his life: most isn't even translated. In sum, I don't know if anybody living is a true expert on St. Augustine, but it surely isn't I or you.
If the views I stated were supposed to be stated as points of fact, then I wouldn't have said "from what I have read". I by the way only read City of God a couple of days ago. Do you believe I read it all in two days? No. I have been familiar with Augustine for many years now. I have read in City of God before, I read Confessions a long time ago, and have even read it twice. And I have also read books written by theologians and philosophers where they write about Augustine and his thoughts. I haven't heard or read anyone who hasn't seen the obvious likeness between Augustine and Calvin. Calvin is more extreme, yes. But he certainly, from all the information I have received, seems to be the one who by FAR is closest to correctly interpret Augustine's view on predestination and election. Okay... Perhaps Blaise Pascal was closer. He too believed in double predestination and total depravity though. The difference between him and Calvin is that Blaise Pascal was a much deeper thinker, and that he believed that believers could fall away from faith(and that Augustine believed too).
« Last Edit: June 11, 2017, 03:20:41 AM by beebert »
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,419
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
What you said is

Let me then say something about Augustine and the City of God. I read some 100 pages of this work today and yesterday and must say I lost almost all respect I had for him before.

Calvin is more extreme, yes. But he certainly, from all the information I have received, seems to be the one who by FAR is closest to correctly interpret Augustine's view on predestination and election.

He thought so too. You and Calvin seem to have minds that operate very similarly.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
What you said is

Let me then say something about Augustine and the City of God. I read some 100 pages of this work today and yesterday and must say I lost almost all respect I had for him before.

Calvin is more extreme, yes. But he certainly, from all the information I have received, seems to be the one who by FAR is closest to correctly interpret Augustine's view on predestination and election.

He thought so too. You and Calvin seem to have minds that operate very similarly.
What about those two quotes? The difference between me and Calvin was that Calvin almost worshiped Augustine, while I lost most of my earlier respect for him. I didn't lose my respect for Augustine as a theologian or thinker. But as a man of high moral standards and empathy. Same goes for Calvin. If I lost respect for Augustine, think then about the respect I have for Calvin... Not so much.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2017, 03:29:47 AM by beebert »
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline scamandrius

  • A man of many, many turns
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,195
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: DOWAMA of AANA
I don't think St. Augustine has a poor view of God, but rather a poor view of humanity.
Good remark.

Believe me, we deserve most of the disparagement we get, from any source. Humanity is monstrous. Humanity is also fairly useless. Humanity requires a Savior.

Actually, we don't deserve Augustine's crazy and outright irrational disparagement.

I don't think anyone said humanity doesn't need a savior. It's a point of fact, however, that Augustine professed humanity to be totally depraved. John Calvin more or less got him right. And so did Gottschalk of Orbais. This point of view was declared a heresy as the Council of Jerusalem in 1672.

No, he didn't. He never did.  You're committing the same error that Fr. John Romanides (of blessed memory) and Rev. Dr. Michael Azkoul do when assessing Augustine.  You assume that because John Calvin taught that mankind was utterly and totally depraved (fact, he did) and that Augustine was one of his influences (fact, he was) that Augustine taught the very same thing (falsehood, he didn't).  The reformers like Calvin, Luther and Zwingli, among others, were always trying to think that the church fathers were "on their side."  And St. Augustine was the church father, par excellence to  appeal to.  Augustine's antropology was nowhere near as developed as what we read in Irenaeus, but to impose onto Augustine all the errors of the Reformation is sheer laziness and rooted in a hatred of sorts.  We all like scapegoats  (it's easy) and Augustine has become the scapegoat for which every heresy in Catholicism, the Reformation and even in new theological fads can be traced to.  Augustine never taught anything about utter depravity and the times that he is cited to support that he did are rooted in clever sophistry and assumption. Don't read the critics of Augustine. Read Augustine.  And for this whole thing about total depravity, I would encourage you to read his Anti-Pelagian writings particularly On the Spirt and the Letter. It 's very short.  You can probably find it somewhere on line in the Post-Nicene Fathers collection.
I have read Augustine. I have read On Grace and Free will, Confessions, and big parts of the City of God. He was, from what I have read, without a doubt close to Calvin in his views. Double predestination is the inevitable conclusion of his thought. Calvin was the one who in his theology of predestination was closest to Augustine and who interpreted Augustine most correctly there. And unfortunately, it is hard to not draw the conclusion of total depravity if you believe in double predestination it seems to me... I might be wrong though.

Yeah, you are.
Da quod iubes et iube quod vis.

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
I don't think St. Augustine has a poor view of God, but rather a poor view of humanity.
Good remark.

Believe me, we deserve most of the disparagement we get, from any source. Humanity is monstrous. Humanity is also fairly useless. Humanity requires a Savior.

Actually, we don't deserve Augustine's crazy and outright irrational disparagement.

I don't think anyone said humanity doesn't need a savior. It's a point of fact, however, that Augustine professed humanity to be totally depraved. John Calvin more or less got him right. And so did Gottschalk of Orbais. This point of view was declared a heresy as the Council of Jerusalem in 1672.

No, he didn't. He never did.  You're committing the same error that Fr. John Romanides (of blessed memory) and Rev. Dr. Michael Azkoul do when assessing Augustine.  You assume that because John Calvin taught that mankind was utterly and totally depraved (fact, he did) and that Augustine was one of his influences (fact, he was) that Augustine taught the very same thing (falsehood, he didn't).  The reformers like Calvin, Luther and Zwingli, among others, were always trying to think that the church fathers were "on their side."  And St. Augustine was the church father, par excellence to  appeal to.  Augustine's antropology was nowhere near as developed as what we read in Irenaeus, but to impose onto Augustine all the errors of the Reformation is sheer laziness and rooted in a hatred of sorts.  We all like scapegoats  (it's easy) and Augustine has become the scapegoat for which every heresy in Catholicism, the Reformation and even in new theological fads can be traced to.  Augustine never taught anything about utter depravity and the times that he is cited to support that he did are rooted in clever sophistry and assumption. Don't read the critics of Augustine. Read Augustine.  And for this whole thing about total depravity, I would encourage you to read his Anti-Pelagian writings particularly On the Spirt and the Letter. It 's very short.  You can probably find it somewhere on line in the Post-Nicene Fathers collection.
I have read Augustine. I have read On Grace and Free will, Confessions, and big parts of the City of God. He was, from what I have read, without a doubt close to Calvin in his views. Double predestination is the inevitable conclusion of his thought. Calvin was the one who in his theology of predestination was closest to Augustine and who interpreted Augustine most correctly there. And unfortunately, it is hard to not draw the conclusion of total depravity if you believe in double predestination it seems to me... I might be wrong though.

Yeah, you are.
About What though? If you mean regarding the fact that Augustine Believed in what Calvin later called Double predestination, then I wonder, have you read Augustine? And if you have, are you capable of understanding what you read?
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline Rohzek

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,013
I don't think St. Augustine has a poor view of God, but rather a poor view of humanity.
Good remark.

Believe me, we deserve most of the disparagement we get, from any source. Humanity is monstrous. Humanity is also fairly useless. Humanity requires a Savior.

Actually, we don't deserve Augustine's crazy and outright irrational disparagement.

I don't think anyone said humanity doesn't need a savior. It's a point of fact, however, that Augustine professed humanity to be totally depraved. John Calvin more or less got him right. And so did Gottschalk of Orbais. This point of view was declared a heresy as the Council of Jerusalem in 1672.

No, he didn't. He never did.  You're committing the same error that Fr. John Romanides (of blessed memory) and Rev. Dr. Michael Azkoul do when assessing Augustine.  You assume that because John Calvin taught that mankind was utterly and totally depraved (fact, he did) and that Augustine was one of his influences (fact, he was) that Augustine taught the very same thing (falsehood, he didn't).  The reformers like Calvin, Luther and Zwingli, among others, were always trying to think that the church fathers were "on their side."  And St. Augustine was the church father, par excellence to  appeal to.  Augustine's antropology was nowhere near as developed as what we read in Irenaeus, but to impose onto Augustine all the errors of the Reformation is sheer laziness and rooted in a hatred of sorts.  We all like scapegoats  (it's easy) and Augustine has become the scapegoat for which every heresy in Catholicism, the Reformation and even in new theological fads can be traced to.  Augustine never taught anything about utter depravity and the times that he is cited to support that he did are rooted in clever sophistry and assumption. Don't read the critics of Augustine. Read Augustine.  And for this whole thing about total depravity, I would encourage you to read his Anti-Pelagian writings particularly On the Spirt and the Letter. It 's very short.  You can probably find it somewhere on line in the Post-Nicene Fathers collection.
I have read Augustine. I have read On Grace and Free will, Confessions, and big parts of the City of God. He was, from what I have read, without a doubt close to Calvin in his views. Double predestination is the inevitable conclusion of his thought. Calvin was the one who in his theology of predestination was closest to Augustine and who interpreted Augustine most correctly there. And unfortunately, it is hard to not draw the conclusion of total depravity if you believe in double predestination it seems to me... I might be wrong though.

Yeah, you are.

He's actually not though:

Quote
"Why does he [God] not teach all, so that they might come to Christ? Perhaps because all those he teaches in mercy [he taught]; but those who he does not teach in justice he does not teach [at all]? Because 'he has mercy on whom he wills, and whomever he wills he hardens. (Romans 9:18)... Thus rightly we say, God leads all to come to Christ, not because they all come [on their own accord], but because no one in any other matter [is able] to come. But why does he not teach all? The Apostle made it abundantly clear: because 'wanting to show his anger, and his power, he endured with much patience the vessels of wrath who are made for perdition, and so that he might make [some] signs of his divine glory with the vessels of mercy, who he prepared in glory' (Romans 9:18-23). Hence it is that 'the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are saved it is the power of God. (1 Corinthians 1:18).' Here God teaches all to come to Christ; for here 'he wishes all to be saved, and to come to knowledge in truth' (1 Timothy 2:4). For if God wished to teach those whom the word of the cross is foolishness so that they might come to Christ, undoubtedly they too would have come. For he does not deceive nor is deceived when he says, 'All who have heard from the Father and have learned, come to me' (John 6:45). Therefore, perish the thought that anyone does not come who has heard from the Father and has learned."

Cur ergo non omnes docet, ut veniant ad Christum; nisi quia omnes quos docet, misericordia docet; quos autem non docet, judicio non docet? Quoniam cujus vult miseretur, et quem vult obdurat:sed miseretur, bona tribuens; obdurat, digna retribuens. Aut si et ista, ut quidam distinguere maluerunt, verba sunt ejus cui Apostolus ait, Dicis itaque mihi: ut ipse dixisse accipiatur, Ergo cujus vult miseretur, et quem vult obdurat; et quae sequuntur, id est, Quid adhuc conqueritur? nam voluntati ejus quis resistit? numquid responsum est ab Apostolo, O homo, falsum est quod dixisti? Non: sed responsum est, O homo, tu quis es qui respondeas Deo? Numquid dicit figmentum ei qui se finxit, Quare sic me fecisti? Annon habet potestatem figulus luti ex eadem massa, et sequentia, quae optime nostis. Et tamen secundum quemdam modum, omnes Pater docet venire ad suum Filium. Non enim frustra scriptum est in Prophetis, Et erunt omnes docibiles Dei. Quod testimonium cum praemisisset, tunc subdidit, Omnis qui audivit a Patre et didicit, venit ad me. Sicut ergo integre loquimur, cum de aliquo litterarum magistro, qui in civitate solus est, dicimus, [COOmnes iste hic litteras docet; non quia omnes discunt, sed quia nemo nisi ab illo discit, quicumque ibi litteras discit: ita recte dicimus, Omnes Deus docet venire ad Christum, non quia omnes veniunt, sed quia nemo aliter venit. Cur autem non omnes doceat, aperuit Apostolus, quantum aperiendum judicavit: quia volens ostendere iram, et demonstrare potentiam suam, attulit in multa patientia vasa irae quae perfecta sunt in perditionem, et ut notas faciat divitias gloriae suae in vasa misericordiae, quae praeparavit in gloriam (Rom. IX, 18-23). Hinc est quod verbum crucis pereuntibus stultitia est; his autem qui salvi fiunt, virtus Dei est (I Cor. I, 18). Hos omnes docet venire au Christum Deus; hos enim omnes vult salvos fieri, et in agnitionem veritatis venire (I Tim. II, 4). Nam si et illos quibus stultitia est verbum crucis, ut ad Christum venirent, docere voluisset, procul dubio venirent et ipsi. Non enim fallit aut fallitur qui ait, Omnis qui audivit a Patre et didicit, venit ad me. Absit ergo ut quisquam non veniat, qui a Patre audivit et didicit.

I underlined the portions that I translated.

- St. Augustine of Hippo, On the Predestination of Saints, Chapter 14

Quote
Let us, then, understand the calling whereby they become elected,— not those who are elected because they have believed, but who are elected that they may believe. For the Lord Himself also sufficiently explains this calling when He says, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you. John 15:16 For if they had been elected because they had believed, they themselves would certainly have first chosen Him by believing in Him, so that they should deserve to be elected. But He takes away this supposition altogether when He says, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you. And yet they themselves, beyond a doubt, chose Him when they believed on Him. Whence it is not for any other reason that He says, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, than because they did not choose Him that He should choose them, but He chose them that they might choose Him; because His mercy preceded them according to grace, not according to debt. Therefore He chose them out of the world while He was wearing flesh, but as those who were already chosen in Himself before the foundation of the world. This is the changeless truth concerning predestination and grace. For what is it that the apostle says, As He has chosen us in Himself before the foundation of the world? Ephesians 1:4 And assuredly, if this were said because God foreknew that they would believe, not because He Himself would make them believers, the Son is speaking against such a foreknowledge as that when He says, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you; when God should rather have foreknown this very thing, that they themselves would have chosen Him, so that they might deserve to be chosen by Him. Therefore they were elected before the foundation of the world with that predestination in which God foreknew what He Himself would do; but they were elected out of the world with that calling whereby God fulfilled that which He predestinated. For whom He predestinated, them He also called, with that calling, to wit, which is according to the purpose. Not others, therefore, but those whom He predestinated, them He also called; nor others, but those whom He so called, them He also justified; nor others, but those whom He predestinated, called, and justified, them He also glorified; assuredly to that end which has no end. Therefore God elected believers; but He chose them that they might be so, not because they were already so. The Apostle James says: Has not God chosen the poor in this world, rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which God has promised to them that love Him? James 2:5 By choosing them, therefore; He makes them rich in faith, as He makes them heirs of the kingdom; because He is rightly said to choose that in them, in order to make which in them He chose them. I ask, who can hear the Lord saying, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and can dare to say that men believe in order to be elected, when they are rather elected to believe; lest against the judgment of truth they be found to have first chosen Christ to whom Christ says, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you? John 16:16

- St. Augustine of Hippo, On the Predestination of Saints, Chapter 34

Quote
The devil who seduced them was cast into a lake of fire and brimstone. The obscure addition he had made in the words, in which were also the beast and the false prophet, he here explains, They who were not found written in the book of life were cast into the lake of fire. This book is not for reminding God, as if things might escape Him by forgetfulness, but it symbolizes His predestination of those to whom eternal life shall be given. For it is not that God is ignorant, and reads in the book to inform Himself, but rather His infallible prescience is the book of life in which they are written, that is to say, known beforehand.

- St. Augustine of Hippo, City of God, Book 20, Chapter 15

Quote
Faith, then, as well in its beginning as in its completion, is God's gift; and let no one have any doubt whatever, unless he desires to resist the plainest sacred writings, that this gift is given to some, while to some it is not given. But why it is not given to all ought not to disturb the believer, who believes that from one all have gone into a condemnation, which undoubtedly is most righteous; so that even if none were delivered therefrom, there would be no just cause for finding fault with God. Whence it is plain that it is a great grace for many to be delivered, and to acknowledge in those that are not delivered what would be due to themselves; so that he that glories may glory not in his own merits, which he sees to be equalled in those that are condemned, but in the Lord. But why He delivers one rather than another—His judgments are unsearchable, and His ways past finding out. Romans 11:33 For it is better in this case for us to hear or to say, O man, who are you that repliest against God? Romans 9:20 than to dare to speak as if we could know what He has chosen to be kept secret. Since, moreover, He could not will anything unrighteous.

- St. Augustine of Hippo, On the Predestination of Saints, Chapter 16

NOTE: Unless otherwise stated, these quotes come from the New Advent translations of his works.

The positions can be summed up as thus. God does not call all humans to himself. "All" means only the Elect/predestined. Those who are not called are damned on account of their own sins, which they could only do because their free will was so damaged, making them utterly depraved.

Care to give us a bit of evidence from On the Spirt and the Letter for your own position?
« Last Edit: June 11, 2017, 10:05:58 AM by Rohzek »
"Il ne faut imaginer Dieu ni trop bon, ni méchant. La justice est entre l'excès de la clémence et la cruauté, ainsi que les peines finies sont entre l'impunité et les peines éternelles." - Denise Diderot, Pensées philosophiques 1746

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
I don't think St. Augustine has a poor view of God, but rather a poor view of humanity.
Good remark.

Believe me, we deserve most of the disparagement we get, from any source. Humanity is monstrous. Humanity is also fairly useless. Humanity requires a Savior.

Actually, we don't deserve Augustine's crazy and outright irrational disparagement.

I don't think anyone said humanity doesn't need a savior. It's a point of fact, however, that Augustine professed humanity to be totally depraved. John Calvin more or less got him right. And so did Gottschalk of Orbais. This point of view was declared a heresy as the Council of Jerusalem in 1672.

No, he didn't. He never did.  You're committing the same error that Fr. John Romanides (of blessed memory) and Rev. Dr. Michael Azkoul do when assessing Augustine.  You assume that because John Calvin taught that mankind was utterly and totally depraved (fact, he did) and that Augustine was one of his influences (fact, he was) that Augustine taught the very same thing (falsehood, he didn't).  The reformers like Calvin, Luther and Zwingli, among others, were always trying to think that the church fathers were "on their side."  And St. Augustine was the church father, par excellence to  appeal to.  Augustine's antropology was nowhere near as developed as what we read in Irenaeus, but to impose onto Augustine all the errors of the Reformation is sheer laziness and rooted in a hatred of sorts.  We all like scapegoats  (it's easy) and Augustine has become the scapegoat for which every heresy in Catholicism, the Reformation and even in new theological fads can be traced to.  Augustine never taught anything about utter depravity and the times that he is cited to support that he did are rooted in clever sophistry and assumption. Don't read the critics of Augustine. Read Augustine.  And for this whole thing about total depravity, I would encourage you to read his Anti-Pelagian writings particularly On the Spirt and the Letter. It 's very short.  You can probably find it somewhere on line in the Post-Nicene Fathers collection.
I have read Augustine. I have read On Grace and Free will, Confessions, and big parts of the City of God. He was, from what I have read, without a doubt close to Calvin in his views. Double predestination is the inevitable conclusion of his thought. Calvin was the one who in his theology of predestination was closest to Augustine and who interpreted Augustine most correctly there. And unfortunately, it is hard to not draw the conclusion of total depravity if you believe in double predestination it seems to me... I might be wrong though.

Yeah, you are.

He's actually not though:

Quote
"Why does he [God] not teach all, so that they might come to Christ? Perhaps because all those he teaches in mercy [he taught]; but those who he does not teach in justice he does not teach [at all]? Because 'he has mercy on whom he wills, and whomever he wills he hardens. (Romans 9:18)... Thus rightly we say, God leads all to come to Christ, not because they all come [on their own accord], but because no one in any other matter [is able] to come. But why does he not teach all? The Apostle made it abundantly clear: because 'wanting to show his anger, and his power, he endured with much patience the vessels of wrath who are made for perdition, and so that he might make [some] signs of his divine glory with the vessels of mercy, who he prepared in glory' (Romans 9:18-23). Hence it is that 'the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are saved it is the power of God. (1 Corinthians 1:18).' Here God teaches all to come to Christ; for here 'he wishes all to be saved, and to come to knowledge in truth' (1 Timothy 2:4). For if God wished to teach those whom the word of the cross is foolishness so that they might come to Christ, undoubtedly they too would have come. For he does not deceive nor is deceived when he says, 'All who have heard from the Father and have learned, come to me' (John 6:45). Therefore, perish the thought that anyone does not come who has heard from the Father and has learned."

Cur ergo non omnes docet, ut veniant ad Christum; nisi quia omnes quos docet, misericordia docet; quos autem non docet, judicio non docet? Quoniam cujus vult miseretur, et quem vult obdurat:sed miseretur, bona tribuens; obdurat, digna retribuens. Aut si et ista, ut quidam distinguere maluerunt, verba sunt ejus cui Apostolus ait, Dicis itaque mihi: ut ipse dixisse accipiatur, Ergo cujus vult miseretur, et quem vult obdurat; et quae sequuntur, id est, Quid adhuc conqueritur? nam voluntati ejus quis resistit? numquid responsum est ab Apostolo, O homo, falsum est quod dixisti? Non: sed responsum est, O homo, tu quis es qui respondeas Deo? Numquid dicit figmentum ei qui se finxit, Quare sic me fecisti? Annon habet potestatem figulus luti ex eadem massa, et sequentia, quae optime nostis. Et tamen secundum quemdam modum, omnes Pater docet venire ad suum Filium. Non enim frustra scriptum est in Prophetis, Et erunt omnes docibiles Dei. Quod testimonium cum praemisisset, tunc subdidit, Omnis qui audivit a Patre et didicit, venit ad me. Sicut ergo integre loquimur, cum de aliquo litterarum magistro, qui in civitate solus est, dicimus, [COOmnes iste hic litteras docet; non quia omnes discunt, sed quia nemo nisi ab illo discit, quicumque ibi litteras discit: ita recte dicimus, Omnes Deus docet venire ad Christum, non quia omnes veniunt, sed quia nemo aliter venit. Cur autem non omnes doceat, aperuit Apostolus, quantum aperiendum judicavit: quia volens ostendere iram, et demonstrare potentiam suam, attulit in multa patientia vasa irae quae perfecta sunt in perditionem, et ut notas faciat divitias gloriae suae in vasa misericordiae, quae praeparavit in gloriam (Rom. IX, 18-23). Hinc est quod verbum crucis pereuntibus stultitia est; his autem qui salvi fiunt, virtus Dei est (I Cor. I, 18). Hos omnes docet venire au Christum Deus; hos enim omnes vult salvos fieri, et in agnitionem veritatis venire (I Tim. II, 4). Nam si et illos quibus stultitia est verbum crucis, ut ad Christum venirent, docere voluisset, procul dubio venirent et ipsi. Non enim fallit aut fallitur qui ait, Omnis qui audivit a Patre et didicit, venit ad me. Absit ergo ut quisquam non veniat, qui a Patre audivit et didicit.

I underlined the portions that I translated.

- St. Augustine of Hippo, On the Predestination of Saints, Chapter 14

Quote
Let us, then, understand the calling whereby they become elected,— not those who are elected because they have believed, but who are elected that they may believe. For the Lord Himself also sufficiently explains this calling when He says, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you. John 15:16 For if they had been elected because they had believed, they themselves would certainly have first chosen Him by believing in Him, so that they should deserve to be elected. But He takes away this supposition altogether when He says, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you. And yet they themselves, beyond a doubt, chose Him when they believed on Him. Whence it is not for any other reason that He says, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, than because they did not choose Him that He should choose them, but He chose them that they might choose Him; because His mercy preceded them according to grace, not according to debt. Therefore He chose them out of the world while He was wearing flesh, but as those who were already chosen in Himself before the foundation of the world. This is the changeless truth concerning predestination and grace. For what is it that the apostle says, As He has chosen us in Himself before the foundation of the world? Ephesians 1:4 And assuredly, if this were said because God foreknew that they would believe, not because He Himself would make them believers, the Son is speaking against such a foreknowledge as that when He says, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you; when God should rather have foreknown this very thing, that they themselves would have chosen Him, so that they might deserve to be chosen by Him. Therefore they were elected before the foundation of the world with that predestination in which God foreknew what He Himself would do; but they were elected out of the world with that calling whereby God fulfilled that which He predestinated. For whom He predestinated, them He also called, with that calling, to wit, which is according to the purpose. Not others, therefore, but those whom He predestinated, them He also called; nor others, but those whom He so called, them He also justified; nor others, but those whom He predestinated, called, and justified, them He also glorified; assuredly to that end which has no end. Therefore God elected believers; but He chose them that they might be so, not because they were already so. The Apostle James says: Has not God chosen the poor in this world, rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which God has promised to them that love Him? James 2:5 By choosing them, therefore; He makes them rich in faith, as He makes them heirs of the kingdom; because He is rightly said to choose that in them, in order to make which in them He chose them. I ask, who can hear the Lord saying, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and can dare to say that men believe in order to be elected, when they are rather elected to believe; lest against the judgment of truth they be found to have first chosen Christ to whom Christ says, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you? John 16:16

- St. Augustine of Hippo, On the Predestination of Saints, Chapter 34

Quote
The devil who seduced them was cast into a lake of fire and brimstone. The obscure addition he had made in the words, in which were also the beast and the false prophet, he here explains, They who were not found written in the book of life were cast into the lake of fire. This book is not for reminding God, as if things might escape Him by forgetfulness, but it symbolizes His predestination of those to whom eternal life shall be given. For it is not that God is ignorant, and reads in the book to inform Himself, but rather His infallible prescience is the book of life in which they are written, that is to say, known beforehand.

- St. Augustine of Hippo, City of God, Book 20, Chapter 15

Quote
Faith, then, as well in its beginning as in its completion, is God's gift; and let no one have any doubt whatever, unless he desires to resist the plainest sacred writings, that this gift is given to some, while to some it is not given. But why it is not given to all ought not to disturb the believer, who believes that from one all have gone into a condemnation, which undoubtedly is most righteous; so that even if none were delivered therefrom, there would be no just cause for finding fault with God. Whence it is plain that it is a great grace for many to be delivered, and to acknowledge in those that are not delivered what would be due to themselves; so that he that glories may glory not in his own merits, which he sees to be equalled in those that are condemned, but in the Lord. But why He delivers one rather than another—His judgments are unsearchable, and His ways past finding out. Romans 11:33 For it is better in this case for us to hear or to say, O man, who are you that repliest against God? Romans 9:20 than to dare to speak as if we could know what He has chosen to be kept secret. Since, moreover, He could not will anything unrighteous.

- St. Augustine of Hippo, On the Predestination of Saints, Chapter 16

NOTE: Unless otherwise stated, these quotes come from the New Advent translations of his works.

The positions can be summed up as thus. God does not call all humans to himself. "All" means only the Elect/predestined. Those who are not called are damned on account of their own sins, which they could only do because their free will was so damaged, making them utterly depraved.

Care to give us a bit of evidence from On the Spirt and the Letter for your own position?
Yes... Augustine was in many ways a very evil man.The fact that Nietzsche rebelled against the western God so influenced by Augustine, Aquinas, Luther and Calvin is not surprising. Nietzsche is therefore IMO one of the greatest saints in the west. What he did was a righteous and heroic thing. Perhaps the greatest evil in christianity, the source of all evil, is Saint Paul himself. At least as he was interpreted in the west. As Nietzsche said and he deserves to be taken seriously:

"Paul thought up the idea, Augustine and Calvin rethought it, that for innumerable people damnation has been decreed from eternity, and that this beautiful world plan was instituted to reveal the glory of God: heaven and hell and humanity are thus supposed to exist - to satisfy the vanity of God! What cruel and insatiable vanity must have flared in the soul of the man who thought this up first, or second. Paul has remained Saul after all - the persecutor of God."

The logical conclusion of the system of Augustine and Calvin  (and Perhaps Saint Paul ) is that the Only one who deserves to be condemned to everlasting tortures in hell is God himself. Perhaps their God will realize that om judgement day, that by creating this world, he made a grotesque and unacceptable mistake.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2017, 11:57:35 AM by beebert »
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline biro

  • Site Supporter
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,881
  • Excelsior
Nietzsche killed himself in an insane asylum.

I'm not sure how you can conclude that he really had his act together.
My only weakness is, well, never mind

Offline eddybear

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,097
  • Faith: Orthodox, awaiting Chrismation
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Sourozh
Which God have I insulted? I highly doubt that Most Christians Believe in the true God. I think Most people Believe in a God of their own imagination, which they then use to terrorise others. That is the God I have experienced and despise. To rebell against a false Tyrant God must be a righteous thing. I admire Nietzsche for ranting against protestant and catholic psychological terrorists.
I would disagree with you here. I think that most Christians believe in, and have experienced, the true God, but the accuracy of their understanding of him varies considerably. The question then is how can we grow in a correct understanding, while continuing to experience Him in truth. And the answer to that is in the Church - both through her teaching, and through meeting Christ in the Sacrament. These are precious gifts that the Lord has given us. Far better to focus your energy here, than on reading things that, at least for now, will only add to your distress.

Offline Rohzek

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,013
Yes... Augustine was in many ways a very evil man.The fact that Nietzsche rebelled against the western God so influenced by Augustine, Aquinas, Luther and Calvin is not surprising. Nietzsche is therefore IMO one of the greatest saints in the west. What he did was a righteous and heroic thing. Perhaps the greatest evil in christianity, the source of all evil, is Saint Paul himself. At least as he was interpreted in the west. As Nietzsche said and he deserves to be taken seriously:

"Paul thought up the idea, Augustine and Calvin rethought it, that for innumerable people damnation has been decreed from eternity, and that this beautiful world plan was instituted to reveal the glory of God: heaven and hell and humanity are thus supposed to exist - to satisfy the vanity of God! What cruel and insatiable vanity must have flared in the soul of the man who thought this up first, or second. Paul has remained Saul after all - the persecutor of God."

The logical conclusion of the system of Augustine and Calvin  (and Perhaps Saint Paul ) is that the Only one who deserves to be condemned to everlasting tortures in hell is God himself. Perhaps their God will realize that om judgement day, that by creating this world, he made a grotesque and unacceptable mistake.

I wouldn't say Augustine was evil. I would say that he was gravely mistaken. And not to be totally random, but you should take a break from theology and go experience some fiction. It seems to me that you have an inability to accept the world as it is or the importance of experience. About your own concerns for Good & Evil, Justice & Righteousness, etc. I'd suggest reading Thornton Wilder's The Bridge of San Luis Rey, play Final Fantasy VI or VII, or watching Season 1 of Gen Urobuchi's Psycho-Pass.

My assessment of the matter is this: If you were as opposed to Augustine's dark vision of God or humanity as you so claim, you wouldn't have such a hard time of accepting an alternative vision of God or humanity. It seems to me that at some level you enjoy the tension that results from such a nihilistic vision. I won't say that there is anything wrong with such catharsis. But do realize that at some point, you will need to move past it somehow.
"Il ne faut imaginer Dieu ni trop bon, ni méchant. La justice est entre l'excès de la clémence et la cruauté, ainsi que les peines finies sont entre l'impunité et les peines éternelles." - Denise Diderot, Pensées philosophiques 1746

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,106
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Yes... Augustine was in many ways a very evil man.The fact that Nietzsche rebelled against the western God so influenced by Augustine, Aquinas, Luther and Calvin is not surprising. Nietzsche is therefore IMO one of the greatest saints in the west. What he did was a righteous and heroic thing. Perhaps the greatest evil in christianity, the source of all evil, is Saint Paul himself. At least as he was interpreted in the west. As Nietzsche said and he deserves to be taken seriously:

"Paul thought up the idea, Augustine and Calvin rethought it, that for innumerable people damnation has been decreed from eternity, and that this beautiful world plan was instituted to reveal the glory of God: heaven and hell and humanity are thus supposed to exist - to satisfy the vanity of God! What cruel and insatiable vanity must have flared in the soul of the man who thought this up first, or second. Paul has remained Saul after all - the persecutor of God."

The logical conclusion of the system of Augustine and Calvin  (and Perhaps Saint Paul ) is that the Only one who deserves to be condemned to everlasting tortures in hell is God himself. Perhaps their God will realize that om judgement day, that by creating this world, he made a grotesque and unacceptable mistake.

I wouldn't say Augustine was evil. I would say that he was gravely mistaken. And not to be totally random, but you should take a break from theology and go experience some fiction. It seems to me that you have an inability to accept the world as it is or the importance of experience. About your own concerns for Good & Evil, Justice & Righteousness, etc. I'd suggest reading Thornton Wilder's The Bridge of San Luis Rey, play Final Fantasy VI or VII, or watching Season 1 of Gen Urobuchi's Psycho-Pass.

My assessment of the matter is this: If you were as opposed to Augustine's dark vision of God or humanity as you so claim, you wouldn't have such a hard time of accepting an alternative vision of God or humanity. It seems to me that at some level you enjoy the tension that results from such a nihilistic vision. I won't say that there is anything wrong with such catharsis. But do realize that at some point, you will need to move past it somehow.

Now we are beginning to approach the truth...
Please don't project meta-debates onto me.

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,419
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Is no one going to acknowledge the fact that the quotes from St. Augustine are packed with Scriptural references, and not only from the Apostles but from Christ himself?
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
Nietzsche killed himself in an insane asylum.

I'm not sure how you can conclude that he really had his act together.
How can one conclude that anyone has his act together? He didnt kill himself btw. He became mentally ill probably because of syphilis. Nietzsches whole philosophy is based on his will to have health he said. Not that he HAD health. But that he truly wanted to have it.
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
Which God have I insulted? I highly doubt that Most Christians Believe in the true God. I think Most people Believe in a God of their own imagination, which they then use to terrorise others. That is the God I have experienced and despise. To rebell against a false Tyrant God must be a righteous thing. I admire Nietzsche for ranting against protestant and catholic psychological terrorists.
I would disagree with you here. I think that most Christians believe in, and have experienced, the true God, but the accuracy of their understanding of him varies considerably. The question then is how can we grow in a correct understanding, while continuing to experience Him in truth. And the answer to that is in the Church - both through her teaching, and through meeting Christ in the Sacrament. These are precious gifts that the Lord has given us. Far better to focus your energy here, than on reading things that, at least for now, will only add to your distress.
Perhaps then it is necessary to question if the apostle Paul had a completely accurate and infallible understanding of God. Perhaps his interpretation of the mystery of God in Romans 9 for example is flat out wrong?
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,419
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Nietzsches whole philosophy is based on his will to have health he said. Not that he HAD health. But that he truly wanted to have it.

How special. And after all how could he have been expected to guess that spending a lifetime of writing making Christ one's personal foe would not lead to health?
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,419
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Which God have I insulted? I highly doubt that Most Christians Believe in the true God. I think Most people Believe in a God of their own imagination, which they then use to terrorise others. That is the God I have experienced and despise. To rebell against a false Tyrant God must be a righteous thing. I admire Nietzsche for ranting against protestant and catholic psychological terrorists.
I would disagree with you here. I think that most Christians believe in, and have experienced, the true God, but the accuracy of their understanding of him varies considerably. The question then is how can we grow in a correct understanding, while continuing to experience Him in truth. And the answer to that is in the Church - both through her teaching, and through meeting Christ in the Sacrament. These are precious gifts that the Lord has given us. Far better to focus your energy here, than on reading things that, at least for now, will only add to your distress.
Perhaps then it is necessary to question if the apostle Paul had a completely accurate and infallible understanding of God. Perhaps his interpretation of the mystery of God in Romans 9 for example is flat out wrong?

Yes I'm sure the Apostle and everyone else except you "worships a false God." Meanwhile your idea of saints are Nietzsche and Leopoldo.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2017, 04:17:25 PM by Porter ODoran »
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
Which God have I insulted? I highly doubt that Most Christians Believe in the true God. I think Most people Believe in a God of their own imagination, which they then use to terrorise others. That is the God I have experienced and despise. To rebell against a false Tyrant God must be a righteous thing. I admire Nietzsche for ranting against protestant and catholic psychological terrorists.
I would disagree with you here. I think that most Christians believe in, and have experienced, the true God, but the accuracy of their understanding of him varies considerably. The question then is how can we grow in a correct understanding, while continuing to experience Him in truth. And the answer to that is in the Church - both through her teaching, and through meeting Christ in the Sacrament. These are precious gifts that the Lord has given us. Far better to focus your energy here, than on reading things that, at least for now, will only add to your distress.
You know... Augustine claimed that most people take the sacraments in vain: it doesnt help them. Either they are "elected" or "damned" without any choice of their own. How the Church has accepted this man and Justinian (!) as Saints but not Origen (!!!) is beyond me. Did the crusaders and the Ones behind the inquisition believe in the true God? Or did they Perhaps mistake the devil as being God?
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
Which God have I insulted? I highly doubt that Most Christians Believe in the true God. I think Most people Believe in a God of their own imagination, which they then use to terrorise others. That is the God I have experienced and despise. To rebell against a false Tyrant God must be a righteous thing. I admire Nietzsche for ranting against protestant and catholic psychological terrorists.
I would disagree with you here. I think that most Christians believe in, and have experienced, the true God, but the accuracy of their understanding of him varies considerably. The question then is how can we grow in a correct understanding, while continuing to experience Him in truth. And the answer to that is in the Church - both through her teaching, and through meeting Christ in the Sacrament. These are precious gifts that the Lord has given us. Far better to focus your energy here, than on reading things that, at least for now, will only add to your distress.
Perhaps then it is necessary to question if the apostle Paul had a completely accurate and infallible understanding of God. Perhaps his interpretation of the mystery of God in Romans 9 for example is flat out wrong?

Yes I'm sure the Apostle and everyone else except you "worships a false God." Meanwhile your idea of saints are Nietzsche and Leopoldo.
I didnt say Paul didnt worship the true God. I am sure he did.And I am sure Augustine did. I just Believe that Paul was not infallible, that he in fact made some mistakes about God even in the letters. His name is Leopardi. He is not a saint. But one of the greatest poets in history. Nor is Nietzsche a saint. That was a willful overstatement made to make a point.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2017, 04:22:46 PM by beebert »
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)

Offline beebert

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Faith: Übermensch
  • Jurisdiction: Nietzsche
Nietzsches whole philosophy is based on his will to have health he said. Not that he HAD health. But that he truly wanted to have it.

How special. And after all how could he have been expected to guess that spending a lifetime of writing making Christ one's personal foe would not lead to health?
He admired Christ. He despised christianity as he knew it.
'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil' (Exodus 23:2)