3 ms·
The 'elect' as a Christian concept is a bit different from ordinary uses of the word. In context, the concept from Calvinism seemed to be under discussion unti
by Natsu 5y ago
The 'elect' as a Christian concept is a bit different from ordinary uses of the word. In context, the concept from Calvinism seemed to be under discussion until someone came into the discussion using 'elect' in the normal meaning.
So I think it's important to keep track of which definition of 'elect' is in use here or you'll just be talking past each other without realizing that you're not talking about the same concept at all:
https://www.learnreligions.com/five-point-calvinism-700356 https://www.learnreligions.com/five-point-calvinism-700356
- amanaplanacanal 5y agoI mentioned elect in the context of classical times and the Old Testament. I wasn’t referring to whatever Christians consider the elect, but a more general term describing insiders with the secret teachings that aren’t to be mentioned in front of the masses because they might be led astray. This was certainly not an unknown idea throughout the Greek speaking philosophical world, including the early Christian church. There are no doubt Christians today who still adhere to such an idea. I don’t want to be misunderstood here: I think the mushroom idea is hogwash. Also it appears that I may have touched a nerve here, I certainly wasn’t intending to call anybody’s religion into question.
- Natsu 5y agoFair enough, I agree that the mushroom thing is quite a stretch. The word 'elect' has a bit of a history in Christianity, though. There certainly were gnostics of all stripes (not only Christian gnostics, but various other purveyors of secret knowledge, etc.). And while the canonical Bible contains an invective against 'so-called knowledge' which seems to be a dig at gnosticism, there were other gnostic sects and works early on persisting for some time even after it was declared heretical.