{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/5260",
    "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it.  Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.",
    "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'"
  },
  "archive": "urth",
  "thread": {
    "id": 5260,
    "subject": "Christ vs Christlike---a follow-up",
    "messages": 1,
    "voices": 1,
    "first": "2008-12-03T17:11:42+00:00",
    "last": "2008-12-03T17:11:42+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<4936BDCE.6090707@verizon.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "David Stockhoff",
        "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net"
      },
      "date": "2008-12-03T17:11:42+00:00",
      "subject": "(urth) Christ vs Christlike---a follow-up",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "I present this recycled post as a follow-up to the thread about comparing Severian to Christ:\n\nPelagic, as a simple adjective, means oceanic, deep-sea. But there is a\nChristian heresy named after Pelagius, a strong rival to Augustine of\nHippo (who nailed down a great deal of Christian doctrine, including\nsome of the most intractable). The position of Pelagius was that the\ndoctrine of Grace, as taught by Augustine, was in opposition to the\ndoctrine of Free Will, and ultimately was productive of moral laxity.\nPelagius was condemned several times (usually by a narrow margin), but\nin practice, Western Christianity has wavered between his side and\nAugustine's ever since.\n\nThe basic points were a rejection of Original Sin (Adam was merely a bad\nexample); thus there is no need for salvation through Christ as it can\nbe achieved by one's own efforts (Christ was merely a good example).\nMan, not God, is responsible for man's depravity (and Pelagius found\nplenty of depravity in Rome), and it is entirely possible for a man,\neven before Christ, to be sinless--we can choose our path. Infant\nbaptism, one of Augustine's most controversial stands (unbaptized babies\nwere damned, which, to some of us, seems like an extraordinarily\nperverse superstition) was rejected. You can check all this out at\nlength in the online Catholic Encyclopedia.\n\n---Alice Turner, from the archives.\n\nPerhaps this was already mentioned in the recent discussion. But I think it's important to suggest that \nonce you accept the theoretical possibility that Christ was not special (regardless of his also being a \nslice of the Increate, since perhaps anyone can be that), you open up a realm of fictive possibility.\n\nSuddenly the chance to tell stories of alternative Christs becomes almost an imperative. How could one \nresist? And Christ becomes a more real person. No longer is a believer (or reader) forced to chose between \nthe mythical and the historical figure, otherwise rigidly set against one another. \n\nAnd the distinction becomes less critical for TBotNS, as is perhaps whether Christ and Severian can coexist. \nAll of myth now can be seen as tales of bad men trying to be good.\n\nDavid"
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}