Kokesh on Atheism + Libertarians

[TER]

Deborah, otherone is accurately describing what your beliefs sound like, namely Arianism. According to the apostolic witness, Christ indeed is the Power of God and it is through Christ that the world was created.

 

[TER]

I agree with you Deborah about the images of God the Father in the Sistine Chapel. Such images only serve to confuse the lay believer. Of course, it is just an artistic expression of the Father, however it does lead to theological errors, which is why it is against the Orthodox iconographic and artistic tradition to render God the Father in such a way, for God the Father is a Person, but not a man with a grey beard sitting on clouds. His essence is unknowable and unreachable to us. He is neither male or female nor anything else we can describe, as He is immutable and unapproachable in His divine essence.

We can know Him by His divine energies and partake in this. This is the divine nature St. Paul was writing about and what the saints of the Church testify to. The distinction between the divine essence and the divine energy of God was a hotly contested theological argument in the 15th-16th century between the Church of the East and the Church of the West, the main crux being whether these divine energies were created or uncreated grace from God. It gets into some deep and heady theology that is well beyond my comprehension, but is fascinating to read about and study.

Indeed, some of the distinction goes straight back to the Filioque which we know was partly the reason why centuries later there was a Great Schism of the Church. The original belief and the one maintained by the Eastern Church is that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, and not the Son, and the alteration of the Creed by the Western Church (which even Popes cried out against before it eventually happened) has subjugated the Holy Spirit into a secondary role. This slight theological difference was like the spoiled apple in the cart which affected the entire bunch, and why centuries later one can study the theology of the East and West and see great differences.

Note, I believe with my whole heart that the differences are not insurmountable and that is much more that unites the Roman Church and the Orthodox Church then divides us. But, we must know the differences and how they came to be and what they have produced in order to go back to unity in faith and communion. I am not speaking solely at you Deborah (who you know I love and admire), but to all my Catholic brothers and sisters who strive to maintain the apostolic doctrines and teachings of the Church.

 

[tttppp]

Sort of, as it pertains to no end or beginning to the Universe. This is a simplistic example, but in my mind, if you could launch a rocket and have it go straight out into space for eternity, I kind of think at some point it would return on the opposite side from where it was launched.

In infinity, how could we not obtain the powers of God? If everything is infinite, technically we will obtain the powers of God and already have. Everything is possible in infinity. The only way I could see God having more powers than us forever, is if everything was finite. However, that scenario has far more holes.

 

[tttppp]

Christ refered to God as his Father. He never claimed that he created us. There is a distinction there. So in the case of God's power or Christ's power, when Christ was in human form, I think his power was different from God's power.

I can see why you would worship God, but why would you worship Christ if you are capable of achieving his power? What exactly can God do that us or Christ can't do? What are our limits?

 

[Deborah K]

In infinity, how could we not obtain the powers of God? If everything is infinite, technically we will obtain the powers of God and already have. Everything is possible in infinity. The only way I could see God having more powers than us forever, is if everything was finite. However, that scenario has far more holes.

I don't follow your logic. I stated I 'sort of' believe in it as it pertains to the Universe having no beginning or ending. We are finite creatures. How would it be possible to have the power of the Universe (God)?

 

[Deborah K]

I can see why you would worship God, but why would you worship Christ if you are capable of achieving his power?

Because as I stated earlier, I believe in the Holy Trinity.

What exactly can God do that us or Christ can't do? What are our limits

Do you really think you can acquire the powers of the Universe?

 

[Deborah K]

Deborah, otherone is accurately describing what your beliefs sound like, namely Arianism. According to the apostolic witness, Christ indeed is the Power of God and it is through Christ that the world was created.

Perhaps as it pertains to John 14:28 where Christ himself admits that the Father is greater than he. But in every other sense, my beliefs align with trinitarianism. They are separate and the same, all at once. I have no problem accepting that, especially since Christ states it himself in John 10:30.

As I stated earlier, my position is very unorthodox.

 

[Deborah K]

from wikipedia:
Arius taught that God the Father and the Son did not exist together eternally. Arians taught that the pre-incarnate Jesus was a divine being created by (and therefore inferior to) God the Father at some point, before which the Son did not exist.[4] In English-language works, it is sometimes said that Arians believe that Jesus is or was a "creature", in the sense of "created being". Arius and his followers appealed to Bible verses such as Jesus saying that the father is "greater than I" (John 14:28), and "The Lord created me at the beginning of his work" (Proverbs 8:22).[5] The latter quote has provided some controversy because it is technically speaking of wisdom. However, many people, notably Jehovah's Witnesses, believe that the wisdom in this proverb symbolizes Jesus Christ because he is later described in a similar way.[6]

Of all the various disagreements within the Christian Church, the Arian controversy has held the greatest force and power of theological and political conflict, with the possible exception of the Protestant Reformation. The conflict between Arianism and Trinitarian beliefs was the first major doctrinal confrontation in the Church after the legalization of Christianity by the Roman Emperors Constantine I and Licinius.[7]

The controversy over Arianism began to rise in the late 3rd century and extended over the greater part of the 4th century and involved most church members, simple believers, priests and monks as well as bishops, emperors and members of Rome's imperial family. Yet, such a deep controversy within the Church could not have materialized in the 3rd and 4th centuries without some significant historical influences providing the basis for the Arian doctrines. While some historians define and minimize the Arian conflict as the exclusive construct of Arius and a handful of rogue bishops engaging in heresy, other historians recognize Arius as providing a conservative response against the politicization of Christianity, or a defender of original Christianity. Of the roughly three hundred bishops in attendance at the Council of Nicea, only two bishops did not sign the Nicene Creed.[8] However, to minimize the extent of Arianism ignores the fact that extremely prominent Emperors such as Constantius II and Valens were Arians, as well as prominent Gothic, Vandal and Lombard warlords both before and after the fall of the Western Roman Empire.

After the dispute over Arius politicized and a general solution to the debate was sought – with a great majority holding to the Trinitarian position – the Arian position was officially declared to be heterodox. Lucian of Antioch had contended for a christology very similar to what would later be known as Arianism and is thought to have contributed much to its development. Arius was a student of Lucian's private academy in Antioch.

While Arianism continued to dominate for several decades even within the family of the Emperor, the Imperial nobility, and higher-ranking clergy, in the end it was Trinitarianism which prevailed in the Roman Empire at the end of the 4th century. Arianism, which had been taught by the Arian missionary Ulfilas to the Germanic tribes, was dominant for some centuries among several Germanic tribes in western Europe, especially Goths and Lombards (and significantly for the late Empire, the Vandals), but ceased to be the mainstream belief by the 8th century, as it was successfully crushed through a series of military and political conquests, culminating in the political-religious domination of Europe over the next 1,000 years by Trinitarian forces in the Catholic Church. Trinitarianism remained the dominant doctrine in all major branches of the Eastern and Western Church and later within Protestantism until modern times.

The above is a classic example of how religious beliefs become politicized. I don't take my cues from any religious institution.

 

[tttppp]

Because as I stated earlier, I believe in the Holy Trinity.



Do you really think you can acquire the powers of the Universe?

I believe zero=infinity. We are capable of making or braking any law except this one.

 

[tttppp]

I don't follow your logic. I stated I 'sort of' believe in it as it pertains to the Universe having no beginning or ending. We are finite creatures. How would it be possible to have the power of the Universe (God)?

If you believe in infinity, there is no limit to the amount of energy you can harness. With unlimited energy, you can do anything.

 

[Elfshadow]

I believe zero=infinity. We are capable of making or braking any law except this one.

hrmmmm see not sure how to reply to this line of reasoning.

 

[WilliamC]

 

[Deborah K]

If you believe in infinity, there is no limit to the amount of energy you can harness. With unlimited energy, you can do anything.

Well then, have at it. In the meantime, I will worship my God and his Son.

 

[jmdrake]

So the "mythologies" of religion are what lead to our current state of violence? So when Ron Paul invoked the Golden Rule in a debate he was leading toward violence? Really Adam?



And it's the "rational atheists" that are leading us to non-violence? Like Bill Maher and Christopher Hitchens?





What's next? We learn our lessons on non-violence from Stalin?

 

[otherone]

The above is a classic example of how religious beliefs become politicized.

That's an interesting point. Arianism wasn't heterodoxy until the Roman state co-opted Christianity.

 

[Deborah K]

So the "mythologies" of religion are what lead to our current state of violence? So when Ron Paul invoked the Golden Rule in a debate he was leading toward violence? Really Adam?



And it's the "rational atheists" that are leading us to non-violence? Like Bill Maher and Christopher Hitchens?


What's next? We learn our lessons on non-violence from Stalin?

I think where Adam makes his mistake is in confusing the establishment of religion with belief in God. He seems, like most atheists, to be confused about the distinction. Religions have been polluted with politicism, and instead of being of a vehicle through which divine power can be channeled into a person's nature, most religious institutions behave as though they are an end, rather than a means to an end - the final authority on the word of God - that kind of thing. Unknowing people fall for it, and people like Adam blame faith instead the real culprit.

He's treading in dangerous territory though, if he doesn't give great consideration to the fact that Ron is one of the faithful, and to belittle the faithful, is to belittle Ron. Hope he understands that.

 

[tttppp]

Well then, have at it. In the meantime, I will worship my God and his Son.

If I'm right, you'll eventually be worshiping me.

 

[Deborah K]

If I'm right, you'll eventually be worshiping me.

Why would I do that? You didn't create me, and you aren't the Messiah. Besides, you are a finite being. I doubt your belief in infinity is going to change that.

 

[tttppp]

Why would I do that? You didn't create me, and you aren't the Messiah. Besides, you are a finite being. I doubt your belief in infinity is going to change that.

If I find a way to extend your life forever, I will be doing more for you than God did. God only gave you a roughly 70-90 year life. An infinite life is much better.

 

[mczerone]

If I find a way to extend your life forever, I will be doing more for you than God did. God only gave you a roughly 70-90 year life. An infinite life is much better.

I'm worried about you. Do you have a confidant with whom you can discuss your ideas in person, someone to keep you, well, sane?

Second, "better" is a subjective judgement. Some people may prefer mortality.