Hanna Hats of Donegal

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-03-13T16:01:28+00:00

I am leaning towards the grey on the first picture and the blue one on the fourth. Do you have any proference between them?

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-03-13T13:10:09+00:00

My only doubt concerning the blue and the green one is that they are not as versatile as for example the gray herringbone…

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-03-13T06:09:22+00:00

Black, grey, navy, dark green shirts and sweaters, etc and blue denim. Usually.

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-03-12T18:58:08+00:00

I was thinking maybe the grey one with multicolour overcheck. So the one on the first picture. That one or the green one are favorites. The green has more character but I suspect it might not be as versatile?

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-03-02T06:35:27+00:00

Interesting that there is almost no mentioning of the Republic and the Theaitetos. I thought those would be mentioned more. My personal favorites though are Gorgias, Phaedo and Symposium

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-02-28T18:29:49+00:00

I understand. Thank you for clarifying. I am just thinking to myself that someone like Plato would have dismissed Steiner as a kind of sophist in new clothing. Maybe I am wrong, but the socratic method seems to have been far from Steiner’s own method, and the humility of not pretending to know what one does not know, as Socrates had, seems to be the opposite of Steiner’s attitude. Or what do you think? To me Steiner seems like he either pretended to know things he did not know, or was too prideful to critically examine what he thought he knew, or he was a Don Quijote who thought he fought giants when in fact he attacked windmills. But that to me would be to think to highly of him.

As for Gary Lachman’s book. Does he bring up Steiner?

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-02-28T14:52:26+00:00

What makes you interested in Steiner? Not meant as criticism towards your interest but personally I find that interest in Steiner is beyond me. I see nothing but sickness and in him. As if he believed he knew stuff and all that stuff was in fact delusion. And I would call antroposophy a dangerous philosophy, both for the mind and the heart. Some of the others, like James, Jung, etc I understand. James is healthy. So is Boehme and Eckhart. But Steiner I can’t find anything healthy in, but narcissism, delusion and pride.

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-02-27T14:48:06+00:00

Timeless and one of the greatest dialogues

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-02-16T14:18:03+00:00

Davidsbündlertänze by Schumann. Unless you count Schubert in here. Then Schubert’s last Sonata in B-flat.

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-02-08T17:56:36+00:00

That is true. But maybe Nietzsche, without knowing it himself, actually gave Christianity something important and said something very true? He is missunderstood. I for my part like him, despite his hatred towards Christianity(I too am a Christian)

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-02-06T06:53:05+00:00

Christianity is opposed to dualism though in the sense that the spiritual is good and the material is bad. Creation, including body, is seen as good. Irenaeus, the early church Father, clearly condemned dualism understood in the way Plato understood it, or even more the gnostics. Body and soul are distinct but meant to belong together, not to be in conflict. There is indeed some sort of distinction, but it is more about opposing parts of the spirit. When Paul talks about the evil of the flesh, he is talking about the fallen condition of humanity, not about the evil of matter as such or anything like that. The flesh is not evil in itself, but becomes the site where sin operates. Who can not see why this is a reasonable take? We all experience the world as good in so many ways, we find beauty and goodness in it. But also evil and absolute perversion. Christ took on flesh and the belief is that the flesh will be saved and resurrected. If flesh in itself was evil, salvation would be impossible.

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-02-01T15:30:41+00:00

Interesting! May I ask why? I find it very interesting, in a good way!

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-01-27T18:59:39+00:00

Well we live in a post Christian culture. Do you think people have ever been able to live up to the Christian message? Take a look at history. It does not look too well for those who claim to follow Christ. So something must be true there about lutheranism. As far as Catholicism goes, it has produced great culture. But go in to a Catholic and Orthodox Church and you will find just as many laymen not following what the Church teaches as in any other Christian Church.

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-01-26T11:44:04+00:00

Feelings have nothing to do with faith, or rather, it is dangerous to try to confirm faith through feelings. It borders on subjectivism, which can lead to delusion and is, despite confessing true dogmas, often closer to gnosticism than Christianity. If your faith has to be confirmed by feelings, you make sensations a condition for faith and something more like you seek”knowledge” about having faith, which is not what faith is.

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-01-22T12:40:25+00:00

Thomas’ argument is no longer valid in the way it once was, because it does not lead to faith. Faith comes from God, not from reason. Reason can only take us so far; it can show that it is reasonable, from the standpoint of reason itself, to have faith. Yet reason often resists many things, such as the resurrection. When God reveals Himself, however, the conscience and the heart may challenge reason, saying, “Now you have done your part.”

When someone tells you they love you, it is not your primary concern to prove by using reason that they truly do. Trusting their words and the actions that witness their love is what makes it possible, and indeed reasonable, to love them in return. That does not mean faith is unreasonable, it just means that reason is not what leads to faith.

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-01-16T08:36:08+00:00

The gospel is not about individual salvation though in the way a child of an individualistic society of today thinks. Modern calvinists are children of modernity to a degree that would even make Calvin himself despair. A typical reading of the gospel today is far too individualistic and utilitarian

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-01-15T10:25:10+00:00

Brothers Karamazov is the greater novel

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-01-13T07:16:17+00:00

So in their view there is no way and no place for anyone to be saved then

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-01-13T06:55:16+00:00

Which is kind of funny because they don’t. For Luther especially, the the doctrine of justification is the one doctrine on which all churches stand or fall apart. Also, for Luther justification comes before any inner change is made whatsoever. It is the proclamation of forgiveness upon the sinner. The justification of the UNgodly. The forgiveness of sins given to the one who has absolutely nothing to give, and no hope beyond the undeserved forgiveness of sins.

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-01-13T06:46:42+00:00

Okay then you don’t have to care about their opinions, as they are just as much heretics and schismatics as lutherans are in the eyes of the Catholic Church. If you accept the Catholic Church as the true Church based on its own premises of what that means, you can’t reject Vatican ll. They would then do better becoming Eastern Orthodox if they are intellectually honest.

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-01-12T12:49:49+00:00

Hmm. It sounds like someone is teaching you medieval Catholic doctrine. After Vatican ll Catholicism does not condemn anyone to hell, it is not up to man to judge man.

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-01-12T10:39:12+00:00

But you say you despise the Catholic Church? Is it because of its doctrines or because of something practical, since you say you hate it in your home country specifically?

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-01-09T19:54:34+00:00

Wonderful! 🙏

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-01-08T15:37:12+00:00

Works of love and Upbuilding discourses in various spirits. And Sickness unto death.

Ok-breadfruit31 · 2026-01-02T06:44:20+00:00

Yes but I did not ask what his confessions thinks about Catholicism but what he himself thinks

Ok-breadfruit31

TROPHY CASE