Christian theology thread for Christians - Deus homo factus est naturam erante, mundus renovatus est a Christo regnante

Why do so many people who vehemently hate Christianity feel the need to defend their beliefs so strongly? In my experience I see the same people argue about why they think my belief systems are stupid.

I never go into deep discussions with them and just say "well that's your opinion and that's fine" but the topic comes up frequently and it's almost like they're afraid of being judged. The same people talk about how if Hell existed they would be scared of going there.

Do y'all experience this as well?
 
Why do so many people who vehemently hate Christianity feel the need to defend their beliefs so strongly? In my experience I see the same people argue about why they think my belief systems are stupid.

I never go into deep discussions with them and just say "well that's your opinion and that's fine" but the topic comes up frequently and it's almost like they're afraid of being judged. The same people talk about how if Hell existed they would be scared of going there.

Do y'all experience this as well?
Wide and easy target, for one, and larping and bigsmart logicreasoner gives a good high.
I don't think there's any real intellectual pursuit in being a Christian basher militant atheist heroman on the internet and in real life it's borderline as retarded as being a fundie.
Most cohesive are the hardcore libtard degenerate ideaologues who at least have a logical end goal in pushing their degenerate trash through demeaning Christianity.
 
Why do so many people who vehemently hate Christianity feel the need to defend their beliefs so strongly? In my experience I see the same people argue about why they think my belief systems are stupid.
They want to justify their sin. If you keep asking them why they believe the way they do, it almost always ends up with them justifying their sins.
 
Wide and easy target, for one, and larping and bigsmart logicreasoner gives a good high.
I don't think there's any real intellectual pursuit in being a Christian basher militant atheist heroman on the internet and in real life it's borderline as retarded as being a fundie.
Most cohesive are the hardcore libtard degenerate ideaologues who at least have a logical end goal in pushing their degenerate trash through demeaning Christianity.

Majority of the people I work with are very strongly opinionated atheists, I don't know any Christians besides my family and a few friends and it's only really atheists that do the whole "beat the dead horse* when talking about religion. I don't know how they don't get tired of it.

They want to justify their sin. If you keep asking them why they believe the way they do, it almost always ends up with them justifying their sins.

I have asked a few times why they don't believe, not to judge them but just to have a conversation about it and it's always a very demeaning and judgemental conversation from their end, but then one person I talk to is very much afraid of going to Hell "if it's real" as they put it.
 
The Wisdom of Bl. Fulton Sheen

Day 79 - His words even imply philanthropy has deeper depths than is generally realized. The great emotions of compassion and mercy are traced to Him; there is more to human deeds than the doers are aware. He is identified in every act of kindness as an expression of sympathy with Himself.
 
I don't know how they don't get tired of it.
I'm not sure if this is true for any of these people, but maybe some are aware that something may be out there. There are atheists who just don't care. It usually shows when a person doesn't believe. Then, there are those who seem to be oddly obsessed with hating God, something that someone who genuinely doesn't believe, wouldn't do. They're really bitter, full of hatred and try to cope this way, basically. And, yes:

larping and bigsmart logicreasoner gives a good high
Pride is very addictive, even if you're thick as a plank. And they fell for it.

Maybe they're in a state of mind similar to what I assume Satan has, aka they know what's up, deep down, but they rebel hard and will literally die on this hill for no reason other than being an addict to their own pride. Also, again, deep down, many victims of Dunning-Kruger effect recognize that they're dumb and make really stupid arguments, but it's addiction to pride that keeps them going.
 
Maybe they're in a state of mind similar to what I assume Satan has, aka they know what's up, deep down, but they rebel hard and will literally die on this hill for no reason other than being an addict to their own pride. Also, again, deep down, many victims of Dunning-Kruger effect recognize that they're dumb and make really stupid arguments, but it's addiction to pride that keeps them going.
There is a reason humility is a Christian virtue, and Pride is a deadly sin. This goes especially true for people with high intelligence. A very intelligent person in a position of authority full of Pride may not notice critical errors and fall to calamity. One look at the debate in the Physics academy over string theory is enough to make you realize this is true. Same goes for someone who has intelligence, but a lack of knowledge. Pride will lead them into disaster because they assume they can figure something out that is beyond their ability. And then of course there is the Dunning-Kruger effect, where pride can convince a person of low intelligence that they have high intelligence.

All scenarios involving what you know, what you think you know, and how you go about knowing it can only be helped by humility. The moment pride is introduced, it does not matter how smart or retarded you are. The devil will have you.
 
The Wisdom of Bl. Fulton Sheen

Day 82 - Humility does not mean a submissiveness, a passiveness, a willingness to be walked on, or a desire to live in the doghouse. Humility is a virtue by which we recognize ourselves as we really are, not as we would like to be in the eyes of the public; not as our press notices say we are, but as we are in the sight of God when we examine our conscience.
 
I was rereading some old documents, as I do from time to time, and I came across Pliny the Younger's letter to Trajan regarding the early Christian community. I know I've made reference of it on this thread but I wasn't sure if everybody had read it or not so I thought I would post a link to the full document for those who had not seen it. For some context the letter was composed between 111 and 113 AD, so roughly 78-80 years after the crucifixion (roughly the distance between us today and the end of WWII), as such it is possible that there may have still been a few people alive on Earth who personally knew Jesus as teenagers when this was written. Pliny the Younger, who was serving as Governor of Bithynia and Pontus (Northern Turkey) was reaching out to Emperor Trajan to seek his council regarding how the handle Christians, who he was finding an increasing number of. If Pliny's name sounds familiar you may recognize his uncle, the famous Pliny the Elder, a famous first century writer who died when Vesuvius erupted in 79 AD.


The letter offers us a view pieces of information regarding the early Christian church
1. They appeared to have female deacons, though this was something mentioned by Paul some fifty years earlier. (Romans 16:1)
2. They were trinitiarian, as Pliny notes they sung praises to Jesus as a God.
3. They employed music in their worship, singing hyms to Jesus.
4. Pliny's reference to the Christians reconvening to take food of a 'simple kind' may be a reference to the Christian practice of communion, which he denotes as a separate occurrence from a regular worship service. Communion was also mention by Paul nearly sixty years prior (1st Corinthians 11:17-34), alternatively his insistence that this meal was of a harmless and plain nature may imply they were simply dinning together. There were rumors that the Christians practice literal cannibalism going around (the term 'body and blood of Christ' not helping this) so it is possible that Pliny was simply clearing this rumor up with Trajan and that the Christians were just having a harmless meal.
 
The Wisdom of Bl. Fulton Sheen

Day 23 - In vain will the world seek equality until it has seen all men through the eyes of faith. Faith teaches that all men, however poor, or ignorant, or crippled, however maimed, ugly, or degraded they may be, all bear within themselves the image of God, and have been bought by the precious blood of Jesus Christ. As this truth is forgotten men are valued only for what they can do, not because of what they are.
 
There is a reason humility is a Christian virtue, and Pride is a deadly sin.

Proverbs 11:2

When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with the humble is wisdom.

Proverbs 29:23

One's pride will bring him low, but he who is lowly in spirit will obtain honor.

Proverbs 8:13

The fear of the Lord is hatred of evil. Pride and arrogance and the way of evil and perverted speech I hate.

Proverbs 16:18

Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.

Proverbs 18:12

Before destruction a man's heart is haughty, but humility comes before honor.

Philippians 2:3

Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.

Proverbs 13:10

By insolence comes nothing but strife, but with those who take advice is wisdom.

Proverbs 26:12

Do you see a man who is wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.

Psalm 10:4

In the pride of his face the wicked does not seek him; all his thoughts are, “There is no God.”

Galatians 6:3

For if anyone thinks he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself.

Proverbs 27:2

Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; a stranger, and not your own lips.

Proverbs 21:4

Haughty eyes and a proud heart, the lamp of the wicked, are sin.

Jeremiah 9:23

Thus says the Lord: “Let not the wise man boast in his wisdom, let not the mighty man boast in his might, let not the rich man boast in his riches,

2 Corinthians 10:17-18

“Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.” For it is not the one who commends himself who is approved, but the one whom the Lord commends.

Psalm 59:12

For the sin of their mouths, the words of their lips, let them be trapped in their pride. For the cursing and lies that they utter,

1 Corinthians 1:28-29

God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.

Psalm 138:6

For though the Lord is high, he regards the lowly, but the haughty he knows from afar.

James 1:9-10

Let the lowly brother boast in his exaltation, and the rich in his humiliation, because like a flower of the grass he will pass away.

Proverbs 25:27

It is not good to eat much honey, nor is it glorious to seek one's own glory.

1 Samuel 16:7

But the Lord said to Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For the Lord sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.”

Isaiah 23:9

The Lord of hosts has purposed it, to defile the pompous pride of all glory, to dishonor all the honored of the earth.

Obadiah 1:3

The pride of your heart has deceived you, you who live in the clefts of the rock, in your lofty dwelling, who say in your heart, “Who will bring me down to the ground?”

1 Corinthians 13:3

If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.

Ecclesiastes 7:8

Better is the end of a thing than its beginning, and the patient in spirit is better than the proud in spirit.

Isaiah 2:12

For the Lord of hosts has a day against all that is proud and lofty, against all that is lifted up—and it shall be brought low;

Luke 18:9-14

He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’
 
Psalm 85:10-13

10 Love and faithfulness meet together;
righteousness and peace kiss each other.
11 Faithfulness springs forth from the earth,
and righteousness looks down from heaven.
12 The Lord will indeed give what is good,
and our land will yield its harvest.
13 Righteousness goes before him
and prepares the way for his steps.
 
1. They appeared to have female deacons, though this was something mentioned by Paul some fifty years earlier. (Romans 16:1)
So this is a common point of confusion due to the changes in language and translations over time.

As you can see from the footnotes for this verse in the New International Version the distinction between use of deacon there and the Deacons we have today is clarified.
1742866900481.png

Then if you look at it in the RSVSCE you can see that Phoebe is referred to as a "deaconess" which is it's own thing that's also distinct and separate from the formal Diaconate in several ways including the fact that it does not involve being Ordained.
1742866910505.png

For more information I refer you to this article.
3. They employed music in their worship, singing hyms to Jesus.
Still plenty of music at Mass today. In fact we had a music-less Mass a few weeks ago and during his sermon the Deacon (sometimes Deacons give the sermon) remarked on how much we rely on music during Mass. Additionally during communion the congregation independently sang 'Sanctuary' which was a touching moment until it went on a bit too long.
 
I've read about it a bit on the side, but what is the Catholic Christian view on Orthodox Christianity? I've read articles from a Orthodox point of view but I am curious about what Catholics here have to say/have read themselves.

Mutual agreements:
Screenshot 2025-03-25 163005.png
Source: https://www.saintjohnchurch.org/differencScreenshot 2025-03-25 163018.pnges-between-orthodox-and-catholic/

Differences abridged for the thread:
  • The Roman Catholic church places reason at a much higher level in the spiritual life of the Christian than the Orthodox Church. Pope John Paul II calls faith and reason “two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth”.
  • At one time, liturgical worship in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches looked almost identical. But throughout the last 70-80 years, the Roman Catholic church has seen significant changes in its liturgical life.
  • Papal supremacy is the teaching that the Pope of Rome has immediate, supreme, universal jurisdiction over every Christian. In effect, he is the physical head of the Church. No one, not even an ecumenical council, can supposedly overturn the ruling of a pope. Rejection of this dogma endangers your salvation. In other words, if you do not submit to the pope, you will not be saved
  • Papal infallibility teaches that the pope cannot err in questions of faith and morals when speaking ex cathedra (“from the throne”; this does not make the pope sinless or perfect).
  • The filioque (Latin: “and the Son”), is an addition to the Nicene Creed. This phrase changes the nature of the Holy Spirit’s procession, stating that He proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, rather than from the Father only
  • Catholicism claims the essence of God (who He is in Himself) is identical to the attributes of God
  • The Orthodox faith, on the other hand, teaches that God is both unknowable essence and knowable energies, following the teachings of Gregory Palamas and the ancient Church Fathers
  • Because of Catholicism’s doctrine of absolute divine simplicity, problems arise in the understanding of both the presence of God in the believer and the effects that occur because of His presence. Unlike the Orthodox, who believe grace is uncreated, Catholics believe grace is both uncreated and created. (Note: this is not a dogmatic teaching. As such this is one difference between the Orthodox and Catholic churches that could be worked out more easily.)
  • The Immaculate Conception (IC) is a Catholic dogma that says the Theotokos was conceived without the stain of original sin (per St. Augustine). This, therefore, is what made it possible for her to assent to Christ’s Incarnation. While the Orthodox agree Mary’s womb was sanctified to prepare for Christ, we believe this took place at the Annunciation.
  • According to Catholicism, the “saved” go to purgatory when they depart this life. In the most basic terms, purgatory is a place of temporal punishment, which allows those who “die in God’s grace and friendship” to “achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven”
  • Within the Orthodox theological paradigm, there is either forgiveness or punishment, not both.

My thoughts: I would not go to the Vatican and proclaim at the gates Popes limited supremacy and know better than to criticize, I view Catholicism as a equally valid way to approach Christianity and wouldn't impede on ones views even if challenged by a authority figure or believer, as long as I am not physically impeded or punished for practicing Orthodoxy.
I am also not under the delusion that just because the Catholic churches corruption within it's ranks that it doesn't happen in Orthodoxy, as unfortunately Orthodoxy corruption in Russia for example is widely censored and covered up for political reasons. There are millions upon millions of people practicing both denominations and calling the other one a sham is not only destructive to mutually recognized values but a heresy against the religion itself.
 
The Wisdom of Bl. Fulton Sheen

Day 84 - It is possible to love more than we know. A simple person in good faith may have a greater love of God than a theologian and, as a result, a keener understanding of the ways of God with the heart than psychologists have.

what is the Catholic Christian view on Orthodox Christianity?
Theologically much closer to us than any protestant, and thus retain legitimate sacraments. As much as there are theological differences, which I will respond to, I think the underlying reason for the Great Schism was a combination of politics and the logistics of communication in that era.

However just as protestants chose pride of self and schism, and have been rewarded with endless schism, the Orthodox chose to reject legitimate authority, and have been rewarded with caeseropapism throughout their history. That is the source of the church corruption in Russia today.
The Roman Catholic church places reason at a much higher level in the spiritual life of the Christian than the Orthodox Church. Pope John Paul II calls faith and reason “two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth”.
God blessed us with the ability to reason for a purpose, and good faith should not buckle under logic.
At one time, liturgical worship in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches looked almost identical. But throughout the last 70-80 years, the Roman Catholic church has seen significant changes in its liturgical life.
The Catholic Church holds the Divinely bestowed authority to bind and loose. Thus it has the right to reform, revise, and adapt to better serve the people as time goes by.
Papal supremacy is the teaching that the Pope of Rome has immediate, supreme, universal jurisdiction over every Christian. In effect, he is the physical head of the Church. No one, not even an ecumenical council, can supposedly overturn the ruling of a pope. Rejection of this dogma endangers your salvation. In other words, if you do not submit to the pope, you will not be saved
The Pope is the steward of Christ's Kingdom. Christ has immediate, supreme, and universal jurisdiction over all creation, so from an administrative standpoint his steward holds the same authority. One thing I will note here is that we do not think in terms of "saved or not saved" that is a protestant notion. If a Catholic is asked "are you saved?" the best simple response is "I have been saved, I am being saved, and I hope to be saved.”

When it comes to things like this a more accurate phrasing would be "if you do not submit to the Pope, you have less of a guarantee of salvation"
Papal infallibility teaches that the pope cannot err in questions of faith and morals when speaking ex cathedra (“from the throne”; this does not make the pope sinless or perfect).
Yes.
The filioque (Latin: “and the Son”), is an addition to the Nicene Creed. This phrase changes the nature of the Holy Spirit’s procession, stating that He proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, rather than from the Father only
Catholicism claims the essence of God (who He is in Himself) is identical to the attributes of God
The Orthodox faith, on the other hand, teaches that God is both unknowable essence and knowable energies, following the teachings of Gregory Palamas and the ancient Church Fathers
Because of Catholicism’s doctrine of absolute divine simplicity, problems arise in the understanding of both the presence of God in the believer and the effects that occur because of His presence. Unlike the Orthodox, who believe grace is uncreated, Catholics believe grace is both uncreated and created. (Note: this is not a dogmatic teaching. As such this is one difference between the Orthodox and Catholic churches that could be worked out more easily.)
The Immaculate Conception (IC) is a Catholic dogma that says the Theotokos was conceived without the stain of original sin (per St. Augustine). This, therefore, is what made it possible for her to assent to Christ’s Incarnation. While the Orthodox agree Mary’s womb was sanctified to prepare for Christ, we believe this took place at the Annunciation.
I've lumped these together because I believe they share the same core issue in that we are disagreeing over speculation. Take the Filioque for example, there is no way for any of us to know for certain the procession of the Holy Spirit in such detail. Thus it seems like a very silly reason to schism over. Whether it flows from the Father and the Son, from the Father through the Son, or from the Father only, the end result is that it flows unto us and that is what is truly important here. The reason I believe the Catholic interpretation is based on the aforementioned Divinely bestowed authority. You can extrapolate that same logic to all of the quoted points. but if you want to ask something more specific let me know.
According to Catholicism, the “saved” go to purgatory when they depart this life. In the most basic terms, purgatory is a place of temporal punishment, which allows those who “die in God’s grace and friendship” to “achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven”
Within the Orthodox theological paradigm, there is either forgiveness or punishment, not both.
Keep in mind what I said before about the Catholic understanding of "saved" here. Additionally remember two important things. All people in purgatory will inevitably get to Heaven, and there are people who have gone directly to Heaven, so Purgatory is not something everyone will face. While it is not uncommon to see Purgatory referred to as a temporal punishment, I believe that is a matter of perspective, where as Hell is a punishment flat out. I understand why its convenient to view Purgatory as a form of punishment for the sake of communication and understanding, but theologically it is a process of purification with the promise of ultimate reward, and there is joy in Purgatory because those there know they are going to Heaven.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Wisdom of Bl. Fulton Sheen

Day 85 - Sanctity means separation from the spirit of the world, with immersion in the activity of the world. Saints would be in the world, not of it; they would have no public relations boosters to publicize them; they would never ask for money; perhaps the one venture which would stand out most in their lives would be poverty of spirit.
 
Back