It does when opposing views claim their authority just as valid. You claim eastern orthodoxy while someone else claims Catholicism, and the Protestants say theirs is the correct interpretation.
The argument folds on itself. Without proof we have no way to determine who is lying/incorrect. I am not assuming its a fallacy I am concluding its a fallacy based on the lack of proof.

Your god did a piss poor job of safeguarding his so called "word" when there are thousands of interpretations and sects among the believers. We have a long history of "fuckups" by the church from every denomination to say otherwise. You cannot call your worldview consistent because even within eastern orthodoxy you have divisions such as Ecumenical Patriarchate vs. Moscow Patriarchate.
Also I don't need to compare my personal framework to yours because even if my world view is wrong doesn't make yours true. This is an appeal to ignorance.

because there are differing claims it does not follow "the argument folds on itself". man this is so low tier it's insane.

"I am not assuming its a fallacy I am concluding its a fallacy based on the lack of proof. " again, the fallacy fallacy.

the Word is Christ, you do not have a clue of the most basic things of Christianity.

pointing out a geopolitical divide that has literally nothing to do with theology again points your intense level of ignorance.

everything is a comparison of worldviews, you have no ground to stand on.

Well I’d take Dostoevsky over, for instance the Eastern Orthodox clerics who supported fascism and the holocaust. That’s not saying much tho, I take Dostoevsky over pretty much any religious or non-religious thinker in history.

Ignoring Catholicism entirely means you’re missing out on the work of guys like Thomas Aquinas, Occam, and Anselm, which is a real loss.

Religious genius is like all forms of genius, it is consigned to the individual. There is no genius possible in an institution.

I recognize only one authority and He does not speak through an institution that is so inconsistent it variously supported and opposed Hitler simultaneously. That’s what you get from a human institution, not a divine one.

and what is your church? If you want to "take" Dostoevsky, submit to his Church otherwise you're larping.

your random reference to eastern orthodox clerics having opinions of fascism or the holocaust is textbook donatism.

You reference Dostoevesky who was a layman of the Church and also mention three scholastic figures who were roman catholic while simultaneously saying "There is no genius possible in an institution." is a contradiction. The divine institution that is the Church is the home of every Saint including genius theologians, this is ridiculous statement to make.

Christ established His Church and promised He would defend it, whatever heterodox protestant "church" you belong to is not it.

This post was edited by majorblood on Jul 6 2026 06:47pm

I belong to no church. As I said, I recognize only one authority.

You’re misinterpreting the word “in” here. There are geniuses within pretty much every major intellectual institution. There is no genius in the institutions themselves. It is not a contradiction, it’s a truism.

If you are not a member of His Church, you do not have Christ. You cannot separate the Head (Christ) from His Body (the Church). To reject the Body is to reject the Head. Communion with Christ is achieved through the Holy Mysteries, not holding a set of propositions in your mind based on your own personal interpretation. To reject His visible Church while claiming to follow Him is textbook prelest.

Through His mercy I hope you are mystically united to His Church if you refuse to unite yourself while you have the opportunity.

This post was edited by majorblood on Jul 6 2026 07:19pm

You made appeal to authority I highlighted a schism within that authority, nevermind the theological differences. That's what happened in 1054 when the church split in two geopolitical factions Roman Catholic and Byzantine Eastern Orthodox churches. It has been splitting ever since into smaller factions both geopolitically and theologically.
You aggressively missed the main point. Your entire argument is based on authority but when that authority is divided then so is the interpretation. That is like asking to obey a master with multiple personalities disorder.

Also I find it ironic when you presume I have no clue on basics of christianity when you just outsourced your own agency to determine what is christianity.

The heretics left the Church officially in 1054, yes. There is no division in Christ, the Roman Catholics do not have Christ and they are anathema, they are by no means the Church. Rome separated itself from the one, undivided Church by altering the Creed and asserting unprecedented papal power. The filioque isn't trivial or a "geographical" difference, it is a terrible heresy.

yes my personal interpretation of holy scripture means nothing, thank you for highlighting this again. Christianity doesn't depend on our private interpretations of Holy written tradition, the Church is Christ's body.

My agency is to unite with His agency, my will is to unite with His will, this is a free choice.

You capitulated completely on your own worldview, which is at least consistent of your character.

This post was edited by majorblood on Jul 6 2026 08:47pm

How do we know Roman Catholics are heretical and not Eastern Orthodoxy other than "just trust me bro"?
They claim authority as much as you do.

Remember your interpretation of the bible means nothing. So how are you able to determine who the correct authority is without interpretation?

(Let me grab some popcorn)

saying my personal interpretation of Holy Scripture means nothing means I do not have the authority to invent dogma or arbitrarily twist holy tradition to fit my private biases. It does not mean human beings lack the capacity to observe historical facts.

we know Rome fell into heresy because they unilaterally altered the invariant Creed and asserted a novel papal supremacy that did not exist in the first millennium. They recognize developments to dogma such as Vatican II and novus ordo, the Eastern Orthodox church does not change.

you cannot use logic to critique the Church when your own worldview cannot even account for the existence of logic. your continuous dodging of justifying your worldview is always so tiresome and cowardly.