I think something broke when imperial authority over the church was sidelined

It gave it more cohesion

And stopped stuff like a bishop callign himself infallible and whantnot

In a way I dislike dogma not that I necessarily disagree with its points about morality but because it's not flexible
I'm a strong believer in good being something real but intangible and belief in this would sort of be a self correcting mechanism

Getting hung up on the details is just a corrosive thing for society

I'm not a christian so I don't agree but fine

the thing about dogma is what keeps me from the catholics as well

like i hate marian devotion and veneration of the saints

Well yes but you don't have access to the literal word of god just writings about what Jesus said etc.

i really do think its idolatry

but i cant be catholic and not believe that

In principle even to a christian good is mostly intangible

You have some orientation

But not all the answers

also some other disagreements

but they are more minor

dosent the catholic church roundly condemn the death penalty as well

I don't care about the veneration of saints but it allowed for pagans to convert to the church by rebranding gods and whatnot

thats exactly the problem though

it was something that evolved out of conviencence and then catholics have to argue that its totally 100% scriptural

I think the veneration of saints is kind of ppl coping with their monotheistic beliefs when ppl have tendencies going both towards unity of god/good and multiplicitousness

Same thing with the trinity

It's not a blatant violation of monotheism per se but definitely an expression of pagan mindsets

Yes morality to a degree is intuitive

Which is why I'm saying it's intangible

Striving for virtue is the main path towards it

That's why muslims call trinitarianism paganism
The intuitive way to express an unkowable god is to say he is unknowable, not to lay out a complex multiplictious nature of him which ppl can understand

not sure if anyone has explained this

the criteria for inclusion in the new testament wasw

1. it had to be attributed to an Apostle, either directly written by or written on behalf of

2. it had to be widely accepted

3. it had to have some value and not contradict the rest of the new testament

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muratorian_fragment

This is the earliest list of canon we have

the oldest fragment we have is from the Gospel of John and is within a hundred years of it being written

@Mr. Nessel yes but the clear difference between Christianity is that God, loving His creation, reveals Himself to it and became a part of it, without losing His divinity. Islam just believes their god is utterly unknowable. Except what he revealed to his prophet, I guess.

Now this is probably best for <#668911109562040371>, but I'm curious about your ontology regarding 'good'

What is 'good'

You say it is intangible, but imply it must be knowable somehow

How does one know, therefore, if something is good? By what process to they intuit or recognize good? How does one measure what is good versus not good?

> Striving for virtue is the main path towards it
How does one know what is virtuous?