Antithesis of nihilism

If you really think about it, Calvinism is the anti thesis and logical opposite of nihilism. This isn't a theological debate but philosphical

Attached: 1546262094531.jpg (404x600, 126.99K)

the reformation and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race
first of the buffet religions

>This isn't a theological debate but philosphical
But is it predestined to be so?

Calvinism is the only form of Christianity that makes any sense. If there is an omniscient God then everything that happens is foreordained.

Take pride in your ancestors dutchbro

Reasons:
1. If God knows all things, then prior to creating everything, he knew everything that would occur in creation
2. Knowing everything that would occur in creation, he created it anyway, he actualized it
3. His knowledge of what would occur must come from himself, not from you, because you as an uncreated entity did not yet exist (he had not yet created anything). Any "hypothetical" would also come from himself.
4. His knowledge of what would occur must also come from himself because if it were otherwise, then God would be dependent upon his creatures, his knowledge would be dependent lesser entities
5. Besides all of the above, simply looking at his all-knowing in a created world, since he knows what will occur that means that is what will necessarily occur no matter what. He knows what you'll choose to eat for breakfast tomorrow so that's what you're going to eat. Anything else is impossible and would violate God's infallible knowledge.

I'm a Calvin respecter, I admire his violently autistic logical analysis, probably one of the brightest minds in all of Western civilization. Elaborate on your theory.

I agree in principle because the reformation was co-opted by monarchs to make their own churches because they didn't like being held accountable by Rome, eventually these churches following the logical path of their conception (i.e., made for the benefit of the crown), therefore changing to accommodate the elites and eventually becoming meaningless and killing the faith of the majority of normies who got sick of of it. HOWEVER, what is the guarantee that the RCC wouldn't just continue on its power trip and nuke the whole of Western Christendom continent-wide instead of just individual state churches doing so?

i commiserate with the prosecuted catholics that got their families murdered by the protestant mob and scorned for being papist sympathizers by that some bloodthirsty mob of freedom lovers. revolutionists the world over suck major dick, and the reformation was the prelude to the french revolution imo

It doesn't matter. The only that matters is what is true. Catholic Europe gave the illusion of uniformity, but it was a unity in untruth. Have you considered that having a singular institutional church is simply not part of Christianity and never has been? Chaos is unfortunate but there's no way to resolve it without the state slaughtering people.

Calvinism's main fault is that it tries to go give you knowledge you're not supposed to have. When this "knowledge" conflicts with reality, it backpedals, of course.
>the elect know that they are saved because it's been decreed by God, they can never lose their faith
>some of the elect fall away
>they never had REAL faith, despite being functionality indistinguishable from people with "real" faith
A completely pointless concept.

well i don't really feel like getting into this with an American but my impression of all of Christianity before the reformation is that of a single unified church, even in the first century and when the church fathers wrote their works. But I know that this point is hated by all protestants so nevermind me, consider me papist scum as you do.

Well your impression is wrong. There were always various groups. They were either suppressed by the state or they died out. You just look back at the "winner". Read a history book instead of pretending you're more educated than me.

Well your impression is wrong, the protestants were the winner and indoctrinated you. I've read plenty of history books, maybe you should "consider" something? Typical pretending to know more and then accusing me of the same.

Are you denying the existence of a multiplicity of different sects in the Patristic era? Are you retarded?

The Church defines nihilism as anything the gods didn't create, because supposedly meaning, value, purpose and morality can only come from gods. Nihilism is meaning, value, purpose and morality that comes from man.

This is a weak rationalization. Gods come from men. And so do all meaning, value, purpose and morality. Nietzsche got it right, that these man-made systems corrupted by slavish devotion to ghosts would be rebuilt by the better man.

Any system of thought that destroys Christianity I am on board with. It's time to stop being a prisoner of this deluded and dangerous ideology.

i see a single church that survived and a smattering of heretical doctrines that all died out, which i'm sure you think is from state suppression. either way we will not resolve this so think of me what you will

How could a person in the year 300 know which would group would survive a thousand years in the future and thus be proven correct?

There is a way to salvage free will and reject (hard) determinism without conceding God's infinite knowledge or even predestination. It is "Molinism", or the doctrine of middle knowledge, named after the Jesuit theologian Luis de Molina. The basic idea is that God has counterfactual knowledge of all potentialities, or what would be the case in any possible situation, including what free-willed creatures would do if they were instantiated in any given counterfactual (e.g., if you weren't a faggot, would you be reading this right now).

Plausible objections to Molinism tend either to argue that it is problematically determinist (eschewing free will) or that there is some metaphysical reason why counterfactual knoweldge cannot hold. The view has some parallels in Muslim philosophy.

Calvinism is gay and retarded for wannabe lawyers who can't admit that the Church is correct, has always been correct.

Attached: Calvinism.png (1876x770, 225.53K)

they couldn't, history is what shows it. it takes a religious buffet kind of mindset to think those sects were on equal footing. there is even an anology in the new testament about what the elders were to do with john and peter

Christcucknity without the eternal reward = nihilism
Christianity, like the virtuous Socrates, are there for you to question your faith past the zealous phase
All abrahamic cult should be removed so we can stop preaching the Jewish genius to the point of larping as them

Counterfactual knowledge could only arise from within God himself.

I've never said they were on equal footing. But the idea that was a "single institution" is wrong.

Those are all the most basic objections to Calvinism that are possible. Pick one or two and I'll answer them.

>Elaborate on your theory.
Well I'm still trying to understand it myself, but I was inspired by what French Anthropologist Emmanuel Todd said

>Todd gives an interesting account of the Reformation. In particular, he describes the paradox that while Catholicism posited an equality of souls (and a forgiving God), it enforced an inequality of men (only priests to have access to and interpret higher knowledge, laymen to remain illiterate). In contrast, Protestantism glorified literacy and individual worship, a sign of equality. As Martin Luther said: “we are all priests.” But Protestantism also posited an inequality of souls: Some souls are predestined for heaven and others for hell. God is cruel and uncaring.

>Todd does not think it is a coincidence that predestination, the fundamental inequality of souls, was most popular in stem family countries, that is, places which were accustomed to the idea of the fundamental inequality of brothers

or maybe Calvinism is the opposite of existentialism and absurdism, either way Calvinist philosophy understood that there was an unfair pre determined order in the universe. Just think about differences in Latin/Catholic ideas about "fate" and Orthodox ideas about fate next to Calvinist cultures. Anarcho socialism could rise in, say, Argentina, but never cultures that embraced Calvinism

Also Calvinism strongly belives in good and evil, more than any other denomination or religion. This can be manipulated by the kike but not bad in itself

Attached: IMG_3002.jpg (1036x613, 94.69K)

are you being intentionally dense or is this some sort of debate club? i see in history a single church that could legitimately draw its roots from the first century, and was at all times dominant till even after the reformation. what are you even arguing? how would you call this? anyway nevermind for real this time, this isnt going anywhere.

Monotheism
Single institution is wrong
K retard, stay democratic and conseving

Google Chutzpah
Amerimutts dont lie when they claim to be real Jews
He does not give a fuck, he barely understands what he is sayibg, he just wants to feel like he won

>The mark of truth is historical dominance and political power
What do you know? Goodbye.
>As above so below
Stay pagan.

fpbp, although it's more bittersweet than anything, since modernity its itself Calvinist. the new memetic phenotypes of the Reformation began processes of disenchantment and science, propelled Europe into its golden age of Enlightenment, and you know the rest of the story.

Per Charles Taylor:

>The program of Reform, by creating a disciplined, ordered society, in which the vulnerable "porous self" became the disengaged "buffered self", created a distance between humans and God. Thus, exclusive humanism became an option through the "notion of the world designed by God... God relates to us primarily by establishing a certain order of things... We obey God by following the demands of this order." A true, original, natural religion, once obscured, is now to be laid clear again.

>Christianity always provided for ordinary human flourishing, but included inscrutable divine grace. With deism, grace became eclipsed, for people endowed with reason and benevolence need only these faculties to carry out God's plan. God's providence, once a mystery, is just God's plan.

>The official Enlightenment story is that "people started using Reason and Science, instead of Religion and Superstition" (p. 273) to explain the world. The social order can be organized by rational codes, and human relationships which matter are prescribed in the codes. But the motive force behind this development was reformed Christianity and its move to a designer God in the early modern period.

cont.

>The usual interpretation of the changing understanding of God in recent centuries is a move from a "supreme being with powers... [of] agency and personality" to God as creator of a "law-governed structure" to "an indifferent universe, with God either indifferent or non-existent." This is the subtraction story, but Taylor believes that it is more complicated than that.

>In the new epistemic predicament, humans "acquire knowledge by exploring impersonal orders with the aid of disengaged reason." They form "societies under the normative provisions of the Modern Moral Order." In the secularist understanding, "human beings discover that they just are humans united in societies which can have no other normative principles but those of the MMO. It is a massive shift in horizon."