Does "get the hence, satan" count as a rude and offensive order per the TOS?
Does "get the hence, satan" count as a rude and offensive order per the TOS?
Check out the TWC D&D game!
Message me on Discord (.akar.) for an invite to the Thema Devia Discord
Daughter, Heir, and Wartime Consigliere of King Athelstan
No, because he should always "get hence". It's in his job description.
Under the patronage of Pie the Inkster Click here to find a hidden gem on the forum!
One thing is for certain: the more profoundly baffled you have been in your life, the more open your mind becomes to new ideas.
-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.
What has medieval Christianity got to do with anything?
Still beats having your critics killed, killing and enslaving whole villages which is what Muhammad would do.
?
Besides, taking a whip to inside trading, golden parachute CEOs may not be a bad idea, better than the Club Fed prisons.they get sent to on the rare ocassion they get caught.
Were Christians the original globalists?
Ignore List (to save time):
Exarch, Coughdrop addict
No. The concept of nationhood is well established in scripture. The Roman Church tried to enforce central control over the word of God, denying the peoples of the world the opportunity to read (or listen to) the Bible in their own tongues. This attempt to monopolize the truth was corrected by the Reformation. You should not confuse the universal truth with the avarice of contemporary globalism. Liberal shills often conflate the two in an attempt to trick Christians into supporting their political positions.
Last edited by Prodromos; April 27, 2020 at 06:04 PM.
Ignore List (to save time):
Exarch, Coughdrop addict
I'm interpreting the word "globalism" in its contemporary context (ie. neoliberal globalism). It would be theoretically possible to have an internationalism predicated on respectful cooperation and trade between nations, but that doesn't exist. And since men have a tendency to be grasping and self-serving, I doubt it ever will.
One should bear in mind that this quote came from a time when Christians were in the minority in Greek and Barbarian "nations." Thus it must have felt like being a foreigner in your own homeland.
As for the Reformation, well, the de-centralization of the Faith and sola scriptura approach ultimately led to spiritual chaos. There are endless biblical interpretations as a result, with each puny man pretending to be a biblical authority. Today, this chaos hurts Christianity more than it does good, since it suggests to atheists that Christians are interpreting the Bible in a way to suit their needs. It's particularly hilarious to watch Protestants and atheists get into theological arguments while throwing Bible quotes at each other. To a Catholic, such a debate is irrelevant, since the Church and its Tradition constitute the final authority in doctrinal matters, not the Bible.
The Roman Church tried to monopolize the word of God for its own ends. I couldn't care less about the uniformity of Christianity or the existence of an all powerful Christian institution. As is evidenced by the minority status and persecution that the early Christians endured, the hegemony (or lack thereof) of Christianity is irrelevant to Christ's message. The Empire's political adoption of Christianity had/has no influence on the Word: it merely assisted in exporting it across the imperial territories.
In this context globalism doesn't refer to a system of international governance, but to an inner disposition. The Christian globalist doesn't contend that nations don't exist or that all nations should be under the control of a central government, but that the good of the nation can't be considered the highest good. In other words, the interests of the nation must be subordinated to the interests of God, which include, e.g., a guarantee of the rights and dignity of every human being. Since the Christian's ultimate allegiance is to God, this has huge ramifications on how he is to treat the 'other' - people who don't belong to his nation, family, race, class or some other worldly relation, but who nonetheless share membership in the Church or the human race more broadly.
Matthew 10:34 “Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. 35 For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; 36 and ‘a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.’ 37 Anyone who loves his father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me; 38 and anyone who does not take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me. 39 Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.Christianity's unique ability to tear down worldly boundaries is why globalism, [classical] liberalism and individualism generally all have their origin in Christianity.1 John 4:19 We love because He first loved us. 20 Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen. 21 And He has given us this command: Anyone who loves God must also love their brother and sister.
Before Christianity, religion and politics were, even if differentiated into distinct spheres, integrated into a comprehensive unity of membership. In the ancient world, each city had its own gods and its own cult, and so blasphemy was also treason. Even the freest city, Athens, put Socrates to death for bringing strange gods into the city.
Christianity—a universal, transpolitical, comprehensive and salvific religion—fundamentally transforms the meaning of politics, citizenship, and the common good. After its arrival, political membership can no longer be the highest form of membership, and the common good of the polis can no longer be the most comprehensive common good. This does not mean that political life no longer has a common good; it only means that the political common good will be limited and instrumental to modes of human flourishing that are not themselves political. Civil society is largely the ramification of Christianity.
Arguably, this separation of religion from politics is the deepest root of liberalism, and it has taken two millennia of thought and action to work out what it means in practice, a work that is not yet finished.
What Does the Word “Liberal” Mean?It's also why as the influence of Christianity wanes in places like Europe, they'll likely be seeing a resurgence in all kinds of particularist and supremacist sentiment - national, racial and other. As Nietzsche said, "When one gives up the Christian faith, one pulls the right to Christian morality out from under one's feet. This morality is by no means self-evident: this point has to be exhibited again and again."In moving the doctrine of selflessness and love into the foreground, Christianity was in no way establishing the interest of the species as of higher value than the interests of the individual. Its real historical effect, the fateful element in its effect, remains, on the contrary, in precisely the enhancement of egoism, of the egoism of the individual, to an extreme (--to the extreme of individual immortality). Through Christianity, the individual was made so important, so absolute, that he could no longer be sacrificed: the species endured only through human sacrifice—All ‘souls’ became equal before God. ...
The universal love of men is in practice the preference for the suffering, underprivileged, degenerate: it has in fact lowered and weakened the strength, the responsibility, the lofty duty to sacrifice men. ... The species requires that the ill-constituted, weak, degenerated, perish: but it was precisely to them that Christianity turned as a conserving force; it further enhanced that instinct in the weak, already so powerful, to take care of and preserve themselves and to sustain one another. What is “virtue” and “charity” in Christianity if not just the mutual preservation, this solidarity of weak, this hampering of selection?
Friedrich Nietzsche, the Will to Power
I’d love to see North America’s 100 million Aryan Christians convert to the religion invented by their own race and practiced for a thousand generations before the Jews thought up Christianity.
Odinism! This was the religion for a strong heroic people, the Germanic people, from whose loins we all descended, be we German, English, Scott [sic], Irish, or Scandinavian, in whole or in part.
Odin! Odin! Odin! Was the battle cry of our ancestors; their light eyes ablaze with the glare of the predator, as they swept over and conquered the decadent multi-racial Roman Empire.
And Valhalla does not accept Negroes. There’s a sign over the pearly gates there which reads, “Whites only”.
CNN Belief Blog, ‘The accused Kansas killer’s neo-pagan religion’
Last edited by Prodromos; May 03, 2020 at 07:21 PM.
Ignore List (to save time):
Exarch, Coughdrop addict
There is no such thing as "Christian globalism"; you're applying a political term to a theological position. The universalism of Scripture is not to be confused with the physical interconnectivity of the modern world upon which men base their policies and laws.
Scripture is not equivalent to a platitudinous reading of the US Constitution. God did not offer "a guarantee of the rights and dignity of every human being" (see the Book of Job for details). What he offered was his son, Jesus Christ, through whose sacrifice all men can be redeemed. Insofar as they separate from the text, political interests, whether they are of the nation, race or class are not simply "subordinate" to God's covenant, they are wholly irrelevant.In other words, the interests of the nation must be subordinated to the interests of God, which include, e.g., a guarantee of the rights and dignity of every human being. Since the Christian's ultimate allegiance is to God, this has huge ramifications on how he is to treat the 'other' - people who don't belong to his nation, family, race, class or some other worldly relation, but who nonetheless share membership in the Church or the human race more broadly.
Again, Christ's universalism is not tantamount to "globalism".Christianity's unique ability to tear down worldly boundaries is why globalism, [classical] liberalism and individualism generally all have their origin in Christianity.
You're crafting an argument to fit a preconceived conclusion. Europe is now less particularist, less supremacist and less interested in national or racial interests than it was when it was decisively more Christian. And you subconsciously acknowledge this reality when you claim there will be a "resurgence" of certain attitudes - thereby implying that they existed before.It's also why as the influence of Christianity wanes in places like Europe, they'll likely be seeing a resurgence in all kinds of particularist and supremacist sentiment - national, racial and otherwise. As Nietzsche said, "When one gives up the Christian faith, one pulls the right to Christian morality out from under one's feet. This morality is by no means self-evident: this point has to be exhibited again and again."
Last edited by Cope; May 03, 2020 at 08:41 PM.
Cope, your post contains so many downright annoying and possibly even bad-faith misrepresentations of what I said. You don't need to reply immediately after seeing a post. Please take the time to read and understand my posts before replying to them. There's nothing I loathe more than eristic debates. Might be a few days before I post again, so hopefully you'll write up a better response by then.
Ignore List (to save time):
Exarch, Coughdrop addict
Me, an idiot: The nation isn't the be-all and end-all of our existence. God wants us to care about everyone, even those who don't belong to our nation, family or race
Cope, an intellectual giant: Wrong! God only wants to kill Jesus. @#$% the US Constitution. You lib globalists can't trick me
Me: You have to be joking with this response
Cope: Looks like I win the debate. No need to get upset :)
And people wonder why I don't visit this site more than once a week
Last edited by Prodromos; May 04, 2020 at 07:14 PM.
Ignore List (to save time):
Exarch, Coughdrop addict
At no point was it claimed or implied that the nation is "the be-all and end-all of our existence"; that was a straw man of your own making.
As explained above, the principle of love thy neighbour is neither synonymous with, nor a justification for, globalist policy making. Your insinuation that devotion to nation can go beyond the scope of Scripture is applicable to all temporal considerations or activities. This being self-evident, my comment that "insofar as they separate from the text, political interests, whether they are of the nation, race or class are not simply "subordinate" to God's covenant, they are wholly irrelevant", remains sufficient.God wants us to care about everyone, even those who don't belong to our nation, family or race
I did not say "f the Constitution". I claimed that Scripture is not equivalent to a platitudinous reading of the Constitution" - which is what your comment about "rights and dignity" implied. Anyone who's read my posts knows that I hold the US Constitution in high esteem. But it isn't the Bible.Cope, an intellectual giant: Wrong! God only wants to kill Jesus. @#$% the US Constitution. You lib globalists can't trick me
I wasn't joking.Me, a moron: You have to be joking with this response
I did not claim to have "won the debate". On the contrary, I explicitly stated that the substance of my post remained open for a response (which it still is).Cope, a genius: Looks I win the debate. No need to get upset
Maybe if you didn't wind yourself up by assuming that people who challenge you are arguing in bad faith you'd enjoy yourself more.And people wonder why I don't visit this site more than once a week
Last edited by Cope; May 04, 2020 at 07:41 PM.