3 ms·

> The objection to your point is that the teachings of Christianity are timeless if true. "The teachings of Christianity" are, in fact, not consistent across t

> The objection to your point is that the teachings of Christianity are timeless if true. "The teachings of Christianity" are, in fact, not consistent across time or across subsets of Christianity at the same time, and for any given time and group of Christians tend to include a mix of teachings that are held by those Christians to be fundamental and eternal, and teachings that are held by those Christians to be applicable in the current context (the latter tend to be presented as an application of the former to the perceived current circumstances, but may or may not be the result of applying any rational process to explicitly held eternal beliefs to any specifically articulated beliefs about the modern world.) Your objection seems to be grounded in claims about the "teachings of Christianity" that are empirically untrue of the actual teachings of actual Christianity as it has actually existed in the material world. They may apply to some abstract ideal of Christianity, but in that case a "modern Christianity" could still exist as a concrete Christianity that more closely approached the abstract ideal than current concrete forms.

geye1234 2y ago
That's fair. Let's replace 'Christianity' with 'the Catholic Church', since what you say undoubtedly applies to Protestantism, and in a less obvious way to Eastern Orthodoxy. And remember, I'm saying 'timeless if true'; the 'true' part is assumed for the purpose of this argument.
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  As someone who has been Catholic most of my life, it certainly applies just as much to the Catholic Church (even to there being diverse beliefs within the Church at any given time, and certainly to change over time.)
  - geye1234 2y ago
    Catholicism teaches that Divine Revelation is God's Self-Revelation and therefore can't change because God can't change. Again, if it changes, then it isn't true. I'm not (here) arguing that it's true; only that in order to adhere to it, one must hold that it doesn't change. That, obviously, doesn't imply that every member of the Catholic Church believes the same thing. Nor does it imply that practice will look different in various times and places, although practice will always have the same goal (Union with the Divine Essence) and therefore be in essence the same thing. EDIT: "will look different" should obviously be "will not look different"
    - dragonwriter 2y ago
      > Catholicism teaches that Divine Revelation is God's Self-Revelation and therefore can't change Revelation may not change, but the actual concrete beliefs of the Catholic Church manifestly do. > Again, if it changes, then it isn't true. If it changes, and it was claimed to be a universal constant, than either the before- or after-change version isn't true, sure, that's trivially true.
      - geye1234 2y ago
        I said >> The objection to your point is that the teachings of Christianity are timeless if true. To which you said > "The teachings of Christianity" are, in fact, not consistent across time or across subsets of Christianity at the same time > Revelation may not change, but the actual concrete beliefs of the Catholic Church manifestly do. The teaching of the Catholic Church just is revelation. Individual Catholics or churchmen may believe all kinds of things, some contrary to revelation and/or each other, but that's something distinct. What has manifestly changed?
        dragonwriter 2y ago
        > The teaching of the Catholic Church just is revelation. No, even in the view of the official teachings of the Catholic Church, the teachings of the Catholic Church include, but extend well beyond, revelation. If the teachings were only what was understood to be unquestionably part of the content of revelation, then there would be no teachings which were not dogmas.
        geye1234 2y ago
        Yes, that was a bad way of putting things on my part. You are correct. Better would be "the basis of the Catholic Church's teaching, and the primary part of its teaching, is revelation". To return to the main disagreement: >> The objection to your point is that the teachings of Christianity are timeless if true. > "The teachings of Christianity" are, in fact, not consistent across time or across subsets of Christianity at the same time The teaching of the Catholic Church, insofar as it is proposed as being part of Revelation, or as following logically therefrom, is timeless and unchanging. One reason is that Revelation is primarily about God (it's His Self-Revelation), who can't change. Again, the fact that different Catholics believe different things (contrary to Revelation or each other), or that some teachings that are not proposed as being part of Revelation change over time, is irrelevant to this. Obviously, if you claim Revelation is an "abstract ideal", then you are implicitly claiming it's false, or doesn't exist, which is an entirely different argument. Are there any teachings that are proposed as part of Revelation, or as following logically therefrom, that have manifestly changed over time?

geye1234 2y ago

That's fair. Let's replace 'Christianity' with 'the Catholic Church', since what you say undoubtedly applies to Protestantism, and in a less obvious way to Eastern Orthodoxy. And remember, I'm saying 'timeless if true'; the 'true' part is assumed for the purpose of this argument.

dragonwriter 2y ago
As someone who has been Catholic most of my life, it certainly applies just as much to the Catholic Church (even to there being diverse beliefs within the Church at any given time, and certainly to change over time.)
- geye1234 2y ago
  Catholicism teaches that Divine Revelation is God's Self-Revelation and therefore can't change because God can't change. Again, if it changes, then it isn't true. I'm not (here) arguing that it's true; only that in order to adhere to it, one must hold that it doesn't change. That, obviously, doesn't imply that every member of the Catholic Church believes the same thing. Nor does it imply that practice will look different in various times and places, although practice will always have the same goal (Union with the Divine Essence) and therefore be in essence the same thing. EDIT: "will look different" should obviously be "will not look different"
  - dragonwriter 2y ago
    > Catholicism teaches that Divine Revelation is God's Self-Revelation and therefore can't change Revelation may not change, but the actual concrete beliefs of the Catholic Church manifestly do. > Again, if it changes, then it isn't true. If it changes, and it was claimed to be a universal constant, than either the before- or after-change version isn't true, sure, that's trivially true.
    - geye1234 2y ago
      I said >> The objection to your point is that the teachings of Christianity are timeless if true. To which you said > "The teachings of Christianity" are, in fact, not consistent across time or across subsets of Christianity at the same time > Revelation may not change, but the actual concrete beliefs of the Catholic Church manifestly do. The teaching of the Catholic Church just is revelation. Individual Catholics or churchmen may believe all kinds of things, some contrary to revelation and/or each other, but that's something distinct. What has manifestly changed?
      - dragonwriter 2y ago
        > The teaching of the Catholic Church just is revelation. No, even in the view of the official teachings of the Catholic Church, the teachings of the Catholic Church include, but extend well beyond, revelation. If the teachings were only what was understood to be unquestionably part of the content of revelation, then there would be no teachings which were not dogmas.
        geye1234 2y ago
        Yes, that was a bad way of putting things on my part. You are correct. Better would be "the basis of the Catholic Church's teaching, and the primary part of its teaching, is revelation". To return to the main disagreement: >> The objection to your point is that the teachings of Christianity are timeless if true. > "The teachings of Christianity" are, in fact, not consistent across time or across subsets of Christianity at the same time The teaching of the Catholic Church, insofar as it is proposed as being part of Revelation, or as following logically therefrom, is timeless and unchanging. One reason is that Revelation is primarily about God (it's His Self-Revelation), who can't change. Again, the fact that different Catholics believe different things (contrary to Revelation or each other), or that some teachings that are not proposed as being part of Revelation change over time, is irrelevant to this. Obviously, if you claim Revelation is an "abstract ideal", then you are implicitly claiming it's false, or doesn't exist, which is an entirely different argument. Are there any teachings that are proposed as part of Revelation, or as following logically therefrom, that have manifestly changed over time?