OneVike
to get
[ON] or [OFF]
My Ping List
Posted on 01/13/2021 4:12:02 PM PST by OneVike
Bkmk
My problem with the Reformation is that Aquinas's Aristotelianism also led to a reaction by Abelard and others to Aristotelian realism. These were the nominalists. Luther was a nominalist - they believed that ideas like "tree" didn't exist outside of us but rather that these things were our minds labelling things only.
So, you get with Luther a turning away from objective reality with a turn inward toward individual experience, which lent itself to the solipsism that plagues the world today.
"Everybody has the right to read and interpret scripture on their own" led in our time to "there is no truth only narrative." It all follows from that, IMHO.
For a classic rant on the baleful consequences of nominalism for our minds and for our culture check out Richard M. Weaver's "Ideas Have Consequences." Written in 1948 (same year as Orwell's "1984" which also discusses the desire to escape from solipsism as the underlying impetus of Ingsoc), Ideas Have Consequences is one of those rarely prophetic books that all conservatives should read.
Many say the reform had not gone far enough. Given the state of the present day Laodecean church, I would suggest the same.
However, I think the Thyratira church describes her and her children, both then and now.
God gave us free will. Men must chose what God gives us and do what is right.
God will judge the heart. To say we should only be allowed to interpret the Scriptures the way certain individuals tall us, only removes free will.
The Catholic Church made it illegal for anyone other than those trained by the church to read the Scriptures.
The authors wrote the Scriptures for anyone who could read, NOT just for those chosen by the elite of the Church.
“ God worked things out so the Gospel would be freed from the shackles of the Church/State system that Ruled Western Europe during the Middle Ages. ”
+1
I am in full agreement. In fact I had this debate with a Catholic friend. It began with a debate on the Rapture. He assured me Catholics are taught against belief in the Rapture. He then began using Latin terms in his defense. I recall “sola scriptura” and “ex cathedra” I am not a scholar in Latin so if I mis quoted you can understand why.
Our debate then evolved into the tradition argument. He stated that when a contrast forms between tradition and the Written Word, then tradition takes precedent. (I guess this is where he formed his “ex cathedra” defense.)
I led him to the Words of Jesus Himself in the Gospels warning against traditions. This argument held no sway.
He then introduced me to the teachings of the Catholic church against “Solo Scriptura” which if I recall was an argument against allowing the Scriptures alone to lead in ones Faith.
And I believe at that yime the Lord gave me a Word of Knowledge in the Scriptures:
John 1:1
King James Version
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
I asked him if he believed in Jesus then how could he deny the Word? The Two are One.
Perhaps someone else could answer that question, bevause he was without response.
Sometimes I wish we did not have free will. God’s will is greater and he wants me to have free will.
Would you rather be a Chatty Cathy?
Free will, means He will get only those who truly love Him in his eternal City after the end.
He knows we are weak, but He has made allowances for our weakness with the blood of His Son so we can be continually forgiven. Not that we should sin, but we will.
The fallen angel Lucifer, is why we now have free will, so that in our great moments of temptation, He will know who will always love Him later.
In our moments of sin, He knows who is truly regretful, and who is not. this who repent and try their best by asking Him for strength not to do it again.
Those are who he wants, and having Free will allows us to know that we know we can be loyal to Him.
The fact you don’t want free will shows you are How, I too don’t want it, but I know why for which we do have it for now.
When God created Adam He created Adam with free will. Along came the tempter and man fell. He could have created robots but He wanted the hearts of men to serve Him freely.
When Adam fell, it was foreknowledge of God knowing he would and knowing He would have to send His Son, the second Adam to redeem mankind.
1 Peter 1:19-20
King James Version
19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
bookmark
As I was reading this thesis (which I might say is outstanding btw) I came to the part about the bubonic plague.
Of course this conjured up thoughts about the death angel and the blood upon the door posts (when I see the blood I will pass over thee) and the children within those households were spared.
Fast forward to the present and we have a present day plague (albeit hyped to a degree) and for two thousand years we have the Blood of our Savior as the fulfillment of what the sacrificial blood was to represent.
Today we have a Babalonian style government saying in essence, apply this vacine to your doorpost and the death angel will pass over thee.
I’ll stick with the Redeeming Blood of Jesus as my defense.
Just wanted to share that thought.
God Bless
It’s hard for me to deal with a history that does not include Aquinadms and Dante and glides by the debate between Realism and Nominalism.
It should be noted that the Renaissance (15th and 16th centuries) was as powerful as it was because of the events preceding it.
A series of disasters, beginning with the Great Famine of 1315–17 and especially the Black Death of 1347-1351, reduced the population perhaps by half or more as the Medieval Warm Period came to a close and the first century of the Little Ice Age began.
Famines are terribly destructive as people desperate for food will destroy everything. This famine killed between 10-15% of the people in parts of Europe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_of_1315%E2%80%9317
But it was just a warm up for the Black Death, which killed between 75 and 200 million people in Europe and beyond.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death
While everyone thinks of those horrors, few realize what happened next.
Farms that had long been single family and were quite small were consolidated, much more efficient, and often needing the hiring of helpers. Because so many older people died, their inheritances went to their children at an earlier age when they were more inclined to spend and invest than save.
Businesses needed workers who before had been plentiful, so wages went up. And with more money to spend, new products were introduced to the markets. And much more taxes were raised.
This meant that noblemen also had a lot more money, and so decided to spend it on the arts and sciences.
Oddly enough one of the new must have products was underwear, creating a whole new industry for its production. And used underwear was recycled into fiber to make paper stronger, just in time for the printing press to make books.
So, with lots of wealth and information flowing around, it gave birth to the Renaissance.
You never read what I wrote did you?
I know, because then you would not mention some of what your wrote.
I am always amazed how people will read a headline, skim a few sentences then pop off with an opinion when they never read the whole pice.
It’s 4800 words long. Tell be with a straight face you read it all?
You and I both know you didn’t
I’m sorry, but where is your almost 5000 word post on history?
I must have missed it. You have a link to it for me to read?
So many people, with opinions on things they themselves have never endeavored to even try to write about.
It’s a thesis not a damn book.
I for one am finding this fascinating. Thanks for posting. Very enlightening.
Thank you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.