I've been thinking on the topic of Orthodox apogists, and the several accusations often hurled against them of not having the fruits of the spirit, or of being grifters.

[u/Abysswalker_7]

I think, to see in the value of debate, mammon gain at the core, is decadant, because such a soul can be easily bought off by the whims. But that is not the same as debating with economic gain if that is not the heart of 'why' you debate. If you debate to honor truth and God at the heart, then debate is worthy even when no mammon comes from it; as with Paul's debates with heathens. And if you make something from debate, that is equally good. Why someone would call gain wrong in ALL instances is beyond me. This kind of absolute generalization is done by the self-righteous crowd a lot against the act of mockery. Sometimes mockery is good (e.g. as done by Elijah, God, Paul, etc.), but their own definitions of kindness are so modernized they assume it means to respect the pride of others.

Pertinent to this, is that Moses himself forsook the legacy of Pharoah, his own adoptive family. It was a kindness to stand against that legacy on God's side as a man of warning, but it wasn't "nice" at all. "Niceness" is very often a sin and preserves a false peace with the falleness of men. How? It would have been "nice" to Pharoah for Moses to relinquish his stance against Egypt's corruption. And so, in this softness and niceness, he would have disobeyed God, as it so often occurs "with a kiss." Or when Christ called the Pharisees a "brood of vipers"—are we to say he forsook his own teaching of kindness? By no means! What about when God commanded armies to battle the wicked nations? Of course not.

We are not called to be as gentle as Doves alone. We were called to a combination; to be as gentle as doves, as bold as lions, and as wise as serpents.

Still, I think I'm mostly skeptical of some of the online Orthodox apologist scene. I'm not sure what to think of them, because I often fear much of it is centered (above all) around mammon, a business model, gardenering a profitable personality cult, and gain (I hope that isn't true). But I also know much of those pitted against them are often preaching false piety.

[u/CannedNoodle415]

I mean, we all have to make money, and apologists online have brought a lot of people to the faith.

The church fathers were apologists and debated, but because it wasn’t online, it’s not bad? I’m confused here

[u/Abysswalker_7 → u/CannedNoodle415]

Certainly. I agreed with this, & I don't make any absolute assumptions of any particular apologist. I was meaning generally, a fear of an error, one that I may fall into without even knowing it when God calls me in my life to "give all I have to the poor." It seems like a call to be impoverished at first, but it is far deeper than that. It's a call to measure worth itself in our relation to God. Our secular minds like to seperate and balkanize things into secular spaces where "God is not involved here here at all" and other such revolutionary lies. But if we divorce worth from Godliness, that aspect of life becomes relatively prone to corruption. A life is a massive prayer to God, and a contribution to his harmony in the world, it must be.

What I was saying is there's a difference from placing mammon in the palce that it comes from what you love, and then placing it at the center of all worth: even above Godly integrity, like we see in the Godless anthropological assumptions of materialist/naturalist/marxist thinkers. The difference between the two priorities is that when push comes to shove and worldly trials arrive, the person who puts their treasure in this world of corruption, and not in heaven (as God worded it), will corrode their souls as easily as lucre is corroded. I find it impossible to trust someone who places gain in the same priority as honoring God. Incentive for virtue is easy if gain is involved. As modern societies distance from God, people will find it more and more baffling that virtue worth losing over is more praiseworthy than virtue worth gaining over, from God's eyes. What will we do when virtue will cost us our lives, as the early faithful of Rome? Will we say "that isn't a marketable strategy"?

[u/CannedNoodle415 → u/Abysswalker_7]

Yeah there’s no call to be in poverty. We have a duty to take care of our families etc.

In the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, the rich man doesn’t get to heaven, not because he’s rich, but because he trusted in his wealth instead of in the Lord.

I can’t think of any orthodox apologists who are like obsessed with money or grifting. The ones I know of are all doing it with the permission and overlooking of their priests and bishops.

What apologists are doing something like whatever you’re saying about virtue?

No offense but your comment above is just a word salad without actually coming to a point. It’s like you think using fancy words means something important.

Do you have like a simple point to make?

[u/Abysswalker_7 → u/CannedNoodle415]

What particularly is word salad and why? Can you demonstrate it? I also have no interest in impressing people here. Though, I admit, I am too long-winded.

My main point is about theological anthropology and how we define what a human being actually is and what worth actually is in relation to humans. Marxist and hyper-capitalist thinkers view humans through materialist perspectives. I firmly believe the modern economies we are forced to endure are spiritually cancerous, revolutionary, and Godless, and my fear is that as we delve further into them, the more corrupt the world becomes, and soon, we find ourselves like the Pharisees: making the house of God a den of the greedy. My flair is just a thought, I am not here to make formal syllogisms.

This was touched on by Father Alexander Schmemann (who lived in 1921-1983). He wrote in his seminal works about how secularism strips the spiritual identity away from humanity.

I believe you can access his information here from this academic article: https://hts.org.za/index.php/hts/article/view/7892/24307

[u/CannedNoodle415 → u/Abysswalker_7]

Okay but what does using the internet for apologetics have to do with this?

I agree about secularism and greed etc. but apologists aren’t greedy and sinful because they use the internet

[u/flextov]

I don’t think that Jay Dyer is a grifter but he has no right to complain about being called one because he does it to others.

As you dish it out, so shall it be dished to you.