except idolatry has never been the highest object of worship

*Palamas drew a distinction between knowing God in his essence (Greek ousia) and knowing God in his energies (Greek energeiai).*

Is knowing God's energies idolatry?

I'm assuming you're coming from the general concept of monotheism

As in an abrahamic religion

Yes, Palamas is Orthodox Christian.

I see, is there a source for the explanation of that energy concept tho, I am curious?

It is based on Palamism and the practice of Hesychasm, a form of prayer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palamism

Will check it out, thanks

Also, the conceptualisation in comparative religion that there is either a single correct religion or they are all incorrect, is a notion based on Aristotlean logic. And, as we should learn, such deductions are prone to error.

Hey! Is anyone online?

This practice apparently constitutes Christian mysticism.

https://orthodoxwiki.org/Jesus_Prayer

*"Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, the sinner."*

although religions can't be mutually correct, as it would contradict the whole philosophy behind a *religion*

there is a reason they were born as different religions with different ideas and dogmas

You're using abstract logic to try to determine the ultimate nature of reality. I don't know how useful that is.

'Philosophy' by the way, is an artefact of Greek reasoning. This is only upheld in the west and by Catholicism, contrary to Orthodox who have always been against such rash deductions.

If philosophy worked so well, why was Aristotle wrong about so many things?

No I get that, what I'm saying is that a religion simply can't exist without denying other religions in existence

As in, you can't form a new set of thoughts without denying the former ones

Three branches and all that

I don't think the belief of the heart has a conscious denial of other things. That is the rationalisation of the mind, probably after it is questioned by itself or others.

Also I wouldn't endow philosophy to any group, how I see it is that it's a practice of reasoning by logic, in it's current form at least.

Well, specifically, I had Catholicism in mind, who rely on Aristotlean logic. I am aware other faiths have different kinds of logic, like from India.

9/10 when a westerner refers to logic they mean they Aristotlean kind.

I see where you're coming from, true.

In reality, we don't really know for sure how the tapestry of religion works in relation to the Truth. The best practice, according to Palamism, is to rely on revelation of the heart, which is the only chance for having knowledge (of a kind) about God.

Logic always falls short.

By extension, when scholars suggest that revelation has no basis in reason, they are in a way partly correct and partly incorrect. It is only an estimation of their behalf. Whether or not it is True or not, is not known. Reality exists beyond reason.

It seems prayer, in this context, is an attempt to connect and witness the Truth, where no other avenues are avaliable.

It is deeply unscientific, but in a way this is also a strength because it opens up the possibility the lies beyond logical deductions.

From what I can gather, Palamism follows the idealism approach for reasoning, although I need further reading on the matter.

Will definitely work on that.

Whether it is provable or not is really not a relevant question. It is only verifiable, if you could call it that, according to intuition.

Islam is a spook. Much like religion as a whole.

The fuck did I walk into

@ZipZapZack What did you mean by this?

its really a strange place

render unto Caesar

Ah, the distinct smell of utter shitposting