Halam

All thanks be to God.

It still fucks me up that it's written "PrZY"wara and not "Pryz"wara.

@energeiologian Elaborate?

I won't explain the context, but the closest I ever came to leaving Orthodoxy was when I was considering becoming a Mahayana Buddhist last year

@Hyperaionian tbf Trouillard is siding with platonism here so I don't think it's oneupmanship really.

Interesting quote by Jean Trouillard: "From then on, the notion of the 'hidden God' changes meaning. The God of St. Augustine and St. Thomas is hidden because he is the infinite plenitude of intelligibility, whose excessive brightness dazzles us. As the sun...

@true_concinnity (Which btw goes to show how we're in an immensely different context from the ancient platonists, too)

@true_concinnity ...being: Why do you believe that testimony? *Why* do you believe in this God?

Over the years, I have encountered an anxiety or discomfort with the religious epistemology behind Pagan traditions. "How do you *know* that Asclepius is even real? Where did that name even come from? When did he appear and reveal himself?" I have many thoughts on the mindset underlying and fueling this concern, such as of taking matters into one's own hands and objectifying what transcends objectification, but here I simply want to point out that it seems to be a mindset of being trapped in one's own head. If I just *look* out at how things have actually gone, I can *see* that a genuine plurality arose (as opposed to a mere aggregate)--thereby requiring a unifying center--which center was declared by its participants to be this God or that God. Whence cometh the pre-disposed skepticism? Or the doubt in Providence, in any case? Shall I suspend judgment about the testimony of red things about what unifies them? This is an atheist outlook manifesting, however subtly or implicitly. Food for self-reflection.

@true_concinnity Hence my contention that the case of many red things partaking in redness doesn't really parallel this one.

@true_concinnity ...just to divinity as such.

@true_concinnity ...intelligible universals like "red" are not. "The individual cannot be derived from thought", as it goes.

@true_concinnity "Shall I suspend judgment about the testimony of red things about what unifies them?" I think there's a false equivalence here. A pagan worshipper would say that he worships a person, a self, and persons are hidden to reason in a way that...

it is perfectly revealed *as* perfectly concealed.

"hidden" by the multitude of things, precisely because there's really nothing more to know or say besides this multitude, this concealing is simultaneously its revelation. Hence it is not the case that divinity is concealed because it is "imperfectly" revealed. On the contrary,