"Not Biblical" or "Pagan"

[Paul Yohannan]

One frustrating condition which I expect many of us have been throughly annoyed by is the tendency of some to attack various aspects of the traditional churches as being "unbiblical" or "pagan."

Regarding scurrlious accusations of unbiblicality, in most cases we present a Biblical basis for whatever is being attacked and are then simply ignored. Thus, the annointing of the sick with oil might be condemend as unbiblical, we quote St. James, and our interlocutor pretends the verse in question does not exist. Or, regarding the Eucharist, we quote from the Gospel of John, only to have the anamnesis from 1 Corinthians thrown in our face in the most infuriating form of eisegesis.

Regarding even more scurrilous accusations of paganism, these frequently refer to discredited falsehoods or urban legends surrounding primitive polytheism, or alternately invoke ridiculous arguments involving the existence of some deity or festival in Roman religion which ostensibly they argue is the basis for whatever practices of ours they object to.

Using their logic, I believe I could, if I were sufficiently demented, definitively prove to such persons, that boundary markers are idolatrous, and the Anglican tradition of beating the bounds, a pagan practice, because the Romans had a God of Boundary Markers named Terminus celebrated on a festival vaguely reminiscent of a Rogation Day known as Terminalia. Then you, my fellow traditional Christians, would hopefully attack me with capsaicin, that I might be stunned back into sanity and realize the madness of such a fallacious mode of thought.

 

[John Hyperspace]

One frustrating condition which I expect many of us have been throughly annoyed by is the tendency of some to attack various aspects of the traditional churches as being "unbiblical" or "pagan."

Regarding scurrlious accusations of unbiblicality, in most cases we present a Biblical basis for whatever is being attacked and are then simply ignored. Thus, the annointing of the sick with oil might be condemend as unbiblical, we quote St. James, and our interlocutor pretends the verse in question does not exist. Or, regarding the Eucharist, we quote from the Gospel of John, only to have the anamnesis from 1 Corinthians thrown in our face in the most infuriating form of eisegesis.

Regarding even more scurrilous accusations of paganism, these frequently refer to discredited falsehoods or urban legends surrounding primitive polytheism, or alternately invoke ridiculous arguments involving the existence of some deity or festival in Roman religion which ostensibly they argue is the basis for whatever practices of ours they object to.

Using their logic, I believe I could, if I were sufficiently demented, definitively prove to such persons, that boundary markers are idolatrous, and the Anglican tradition of beating the bounds, a pagan practice, because the Romans had a God of Boundary Markers named Terminus celebrated on a festival vaguely reminiscent of a Rogation Day known as Terminalia. Then you, my fellow traditional Christians, would hopefully attack me with capsaicin, that I might be stunned back into sanity and realize the madness of such a fallacious mode of thought.

Some people don't want the truth; they just want to point at others in judgment, to make themselves appear "holier than thou", to be able to have pride and boast in themselves: you can never reason with these people because they do not care about reason or truth; that is not what spirit they are of. I'm not a "traditional Christian" in the sense, but I feel for you in the face of such torch-wielding mobs, full of self-righteous zeal yet bereft of reason or empathy of understanding. But I'm of the mind that, if they infuriate you, or, cause you to stoop to their level, then they have won. They are merely another trial to be endured in patience and love of God.

BUT, I can say that I know the mobs well enough myself. I would've been burned at the stake a thousand times over by now; but I keep managing to slip away. But then I always recall this verse: Matthew 10:25

 

[Sketcher]

The type of people you seem to be describing annoy many Protestants as well. I've also seen Catholic and Orthodox opinions that are equally divorced from reality. This is a matter too important to be left to those who refuse to see reason.

 

[Paul Yohannan]

Note that my remarks were addressed to the traditional theology community as a whole, which includes Protestants (note also the reference to Anglicanism).

 

[Gnarwhal]

One frustrating condition which I expect many of us have been throughly annoyed by is the tendency of some to attack various aspects of the traditional churches as being "unbiblical" or "pagan."

Regarding scurrlious accusations of unbiblicality, in most cases we present a Biblical basis for whatever is being attacked and are then simply ignored. Thus, the annointing of the sick with oil might be condemend as unbiblical, we quote St. James, and our interlocutor pretends the verse in question does not exist. Or, regarding the Eucharist, we quote from the Gospel of John, only to have the anamnesis from 1 Corinthians thrown in our face in the most infuriating form of eisegesis.

Regarding even more scurrilous accusations of paganism, these frequently refer to discredited falsehoods or urban legends surrounding primitive polytheism, or alternately invoke ridiculous arguments involving the existence of some deity or festival in Roman religion which ostensibly they argue is the basis for whatever practices of ours they object to.

Using their logic, I believe I could, if I were sufficiently demented, definitively prove to such persons, that boundary markers are idolatrous, and the Anglican tradition of beating the bounds, a pagan practice, because the Romans had a God of Boundary Markers named Terminus celebrated on a festival vaguely reminiscent of a Rogation Day known as Terminalia. Then you, my fellow traditional Christians, would hopefully attack me with capsaicin, that I might be stunned back into sanity and realize the madness of such a fallacious mode of thought.

I've been on this forum for over eight years now, and for a long time I carried a chip on my shoulder against folks like that. I would write up, what I thought was, a pretty solid treatise disproving their argument and making a case for historic, traditional Christianity. I've also learned in my time here that 9.9/10 times counterarguments fall on deaf ears with that sort of crowd.

You must understand that those people don't come to CF for dialogue, they don't come for genuine discussion whatsoever, they come here for two reasons: 1) To launch a crusade against traditional folk, and 2) To find an echo chamber.

There's no introspection, there's no willingness to challenge what they believe and see if it holds up, they're the online equivalent of the Westboro Baptist Church when they picket. They simply want to incite an angry response.

It wasn't until I began converting to Catholicism that I let go of that chip on my shoulder and felt completely at peace with my faith. I can't be bothered to prove myself to anybody, much less anybody who isn't interested in my side of the conversation to begin with.

I'm grateful for sub-forums like this and One Bread, One Body though, because it allows us places where we can have civil conversation with each other without considering how someone might blindly charge in and verbally accost us for being "unchristian", "pagan" or otherwise "sacrilegious".

 

[Paul Yohannan]

I've been on this forum for over eight years now, and for a long time I carried a chip on my shoulder against folks like that. I would write up, what I thought was, a pretty solid treatise disproving their argument and making a case for historic, traditional Christianity. I've also learned in my time here that 9.9/10 times counterarguments fall on deaf ears with that sort of crowd.

You must understand that those people don't come to CF for dialogue, they don't come for genuine discussion whatsoever, they come here for two reasons: 1) To launch a crusade against traditional folk, and 2) To find an echo chamber.

There's no introspection, there's no willingness to challenge what they believe and see if it holds up, they're the online equivalent of the Westboro Baptist Church when they picket. They simply want to incite an angry response.

It wasn't until I began converting to Catholicism that I let go of that chip on my shoulder and felt completely at peace with my faith. I can't be bothered to prove myself to anybody, much less anybody who isn't interested in my side of the conversation to begin with.

I'm grateful for sub-forums like this and One Bread, One Body though, because it allows us places where we can have civil conversation with each other without considering how someone might blindly charge in and verbally accost us for being "unchristian", "pagan" or otherwise "sacrilegious".

I do believe that participating in the attack threads in question can add value, by way of presenting an alternative perspective, but you have to do it with a resigned appreciation that the OP isnt going to change their view.

 

[~Anastasia~]

It's certainly possible that others may be lurking and reading. I'm not saying anyone must do it - it's pretty counterproductive to my own spiritual condition.

But you may be planting seeds you know nothing about.

 

[Gnarwhal]

I do believe that participating in the attack threads in question can add value, by way of presenting an alternative perspective, but you have to do it with a resigned appreciation that the OP isnt going to change their view.

Indeed, otherwise it can get the better of you.

I miss PaladinValer, all he had to do was go in an point out the many logical fallacies they were committing and it nullified their arguments. Swift and decisive. But eventually even he had enough.

 

[Paul Yohannan]

It's certainly possible that others may be lurking and reading. I'm not saying anyone must do it - it's pretty counterproductive to my own spiritual condition.

But you may be planting seeds you know nothing about.

That is the hope. It is counterproductive if done in an angry or impassioned way. So if you cannot read it without becoming agitated, it is best to avoid material of this sort. In this respect TT becomes a bucolic walled garden where interdenominational conversation can occur without external trolling.

 

[~Anastasia~]

That is the hope. It is counterproductive if done in an angry or impassioned way. So if you cannot read it without becoming agitated, it is best to avoid material of this sort. In this respect TT becomes a bucolic walled garden where interdenominational conversation can occur without external trolling.

Agitation isn't the problem.

My SF keeps a pretty close eye on things for me, and it is by his direction I refrain for now.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Indeed, otherwise it can get the better of you.

I miss PaladinValer, all he had to do was go in an point out the many logical fallacies they were committing and it nullified their arguments. Swift and decisive. But eventually even he had enough.

I miss him too, and quite a few others ...

 

[Gnarwhal]

I miss him too, and quite a few others ...

Maybe they'll come back someday. I keep thinking maybe I'll shoot him a message on Facebook and put a bug in his ear, but I can't blame someone for leaving here. It's hard enough too.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

It's the others you need worry about .. jus sayin

 

[Gnarwhal]

It's the others you need worry about .. jus sayin

Explain.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Explain.

There are many Kylissa said she missed. PaladinValer was one of the good ones.

 

[Gnarwhal]

There are many Kylissa said she missed. PaladinValer was one of the good ones.

Ah, got ya. Yes, you're indeed right.

 

[~Anastasia~]

It's the others you need worry about .. jus sayin

Someone I need to worry about?

I know why most of them left, though I wish they hadn't.

I worry most about MamaKidogo. I'm not sure why she left and I stopped hearing from her.

There are many Kylissa said she missed. PaladinValer was one of the good ones.

I thought of them all as "good ones".

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Someone I need to worry about?

I know why most of them left, though I wish they hadn't.

I worry most about MamaKidogo. I'm not sure why she left and I stopped hearing from her.

Ya she was lots of fun for sure

 

[Gnarwhal]

Someone I need to worry about?

I know why most of them left, though I wish they hadn't.

I worry most about MamaKidogo. I'm not sure why she left and I stopped hearing from her.



I thought of them all as "good ones".

Ah I hope she's okay too, she just up and disappeared. I think it's been almost two years since she posted in the Google Group.

 

[tz620q]

Indeed, otherwise it can get the better of you.

The true heroes are the people that go to the sites where Traditional Theology is condemned with little moderation and a vast majority against you and still keep their cool. At least on here, there are reasoned responses and somewhat civil dialogue most of the time. So even when someone from one of these other sites wonders in with the attitude that they can use the same low brow bullying here, they are usually met with a fairly cohesive wall of counter argument that eventually discourages them.