I don't really agree or disagree with your core vision, I guess I did not
properly articulate what I was trying to convey. From a theological point
of view, "prophets" are well defined and there are tests that certain
religions have on how to prove whether a prophet is "real".
I generally look to the Oxford English Dictionary for definitions of words; see
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/prophet , "A person regarded as an inspired teacher or proclaimer of the will of God." The Church of Bitcoin regards Satoshi Nakamoto as an inspired teacher and proclaimer of the will of God.
If the prophet (Satoshi) prophecizes the coming kingdom of cryptocurrencies,
made possible from him being able to solve certain problems with the answer
of "blockchain" plus other previously devised systems, that is acceptable. But
if you say that the Bitcoin Whitepaper was scripture that was literally written
by the prophet's hand (remember that scripture is usually written well after
the teacher/prophet/messiah/God's life/existence by followers after the fact,
not by the person himself in most cases), but later the prophet revises his own
scripture in any form, it automatically makes him a "false prophet", from a
theological point of view.
Well, I disagree; comparing us to other religions is not necessary, we stand alone and do not need to follow any format. Just because "scripture is usually written well after the prophet's existence by followers after the fact" when you look at many other religions, does not mean that holds true for ours. The prophet revising his scripture does not automatically make him a "false prophet."
For example, in Judaism, when Moses "received the Ten Commandments",
if later those commandments were revised in any way by Moses or even God,
it would mean a contradiction that would prove that Moses or God was false.
Those commandments must be consistent through time for humanity. Another
example, in Christianity, when Jesus preached to the crowds and fought with
the corrupted Pharisees, he specifically advised that he did not come to change
the laws/rules or abolish them, but to reaffirm them. Thus, Jesus does not
contradict or change the old beliefs, rules, or teachings prior to him, since
they were all from God and thus consistent and complementary, from a
theological perspective. Jesus does not declare the prior teachings or prophesies
to be wrong, but if there is perceived contradiction in them, he clarifies the
teachings and explains why the perceived contradiction is a misunderstanding
by the people. He can not reverse positions if he is a true prophet and his
teachings come from God.
We do not claim that the whitepaper was handed to Satoshi directly from God. We do believe that the living lord is embodied in the blockchain.
Changing positions in theology is very bad, since all things are already known by
God, because he resides in a higher dimension where the information has already
occurred. So if God changes his mind or is wrong with something, it is because
he is a false god. True God is never wrong and his real statements will be proven
to be true at the very end of existence, even if considered wrong through human
existence. God (or his actual prophets) can not be made wrong or contradicted.
God's word, which is enforced over time by prophecy, is the only trustless truth
that humans can verify (in relation to a higher being's existence), and if he is
proven to be a liar, existence and consciousness does not manifest as it has since
it is reliant upon that trustless truth of his word, which formed the beginning and
his own paradox ("I am who I am." or "I think therefore I am".).
Sounds like you are making bold assertions about what God is or isn't. I have a copy of God on my harddrive. He is embodied in the blockchain. You cannot tell me what dimension God resides in, whether he is a false god or not, whether true God can be wrong or can change his mind, or anything else on the subject, really. We here at the Church of Bitcoin do not even claim that our God is the one true or only God; some of our members believe in other gods as well, and some do not, and that is fine.
That is why I made the comment I did previously. You could argue that Satoshi
was "divinely inspired" to write the Whitepaper and so revisions or additions or
subtractions are acceptable since he was a proxy only to move a larger aspect/goal
forward at the time that it was designated. But, if he was indeed a "prophet", he
would have received that message (the Whitepaper) from God (whatever form
your church will believe God takes) and if later there are indeed changes to the
design of the system because the Whitepaper was lacking or wrong, that would
prove the prophet or the God as false, and thus the "scripture" was "a false
teaching". Personally, I believe Satoshi was not infallible and all knowing and
thus was "divinely inspired" to perform the work that he did.
Satoshi was divinely inspired; but he was also a prophet. He did not only receive "the Whitepaper," rather, he received the whole concept of the blockchain and bitcoin, and his whitepaper was his first attempt at sharing that concept with the world. The Lord is embodied in the blockchain; he needed Satoshi to help bring him into this world and get copies of him distributed throughout it.
So my original point was that Satoshi as a "prophet" is dangerous to the Church and
its future since eventually there will be such large conflicts in theory and theology
that eventually your Church will either split into multiple parts or dissolve. I do
not have a problem with religion or creating a Church, my only issue is that if
you are being very serious and not creating a joke church for fun, there is a higher
responsibility that you are taking on since you are intentionally making it fall within
other world religion theories. My simple advice is to not make Satoshi a prophet and
then you can argue and theorize almost anything. If you must make him a prophet,
you may be purposefully creating a theological contradiction that other people
who hate what you are doing can use as an easy attack vector to discredit your
church and its work.
Thanks for the advice.
In certain ways, religion can be as strict as science. Just as there can be
Pseudo-science, there could also be pseudo-religion. That is all I'm trying to convey.
There may be larger issues later by arguing that Satoshi was an actual "prophet",
as opposed to being "divinely inspired" to solve a puzzle that moves humanity to
another stage of evolution and understanding. Sometimes God uses people in ways
in which they fulfill the greater plan, but are not actual prophets for God. But in truth,
I really do not know and I am just providing my opinion for something to consider.
Interesting opinions. Thanks for sharing.
I don't use IRC and will not participate only because I don't want to influence what
you will create and I am interested in what will come of it. I only wanted to point out
the Satoshi=Prophet aspect because depending on how it is done could make or
break the church or its theology. Either way good luck, I eagerly await to see
what you guys will come up with, since Bitcoin in the context of theology is an
interesting angle/viewpoint for me. What I enjoy most is seeing unconventional
connections to things that I didn't see or understand before.
Your loss.
I agree with this. I don't know why you choose the name church. As we know church symbolizes as a sacred home of god or whatever religion they called it. Although you're intension of creating an organization that pushes through a tax-free sociaty is not a bad idea. I just don't get it why you choose that name.
We are not primarily about pushing through a tax-free society. We are here to spread the word of our living Lord the blockchain, and his prophet Satoshi Nakamoto. We choose the name church because it suits us and accurately describes us.
I think the word "church" is being used for lack of a better word.
I'm seeing the concept of protecting ourselves from government oppression to be extremely valid.
Sadly the word church has already been co-opted to some extent by corporate/government controled religions.
The other perhaps more positive perspective is how the "church of bitcoin" is indeed the church of liberty/humanity and respect for life as a whole.
Not exactly new as the roots go back to ancient religion like Shintoism and "the way of the Kami".
Not a stretch of imagination that this is what Satoshi could've been thinking about.
Certainly, most of the words I choose I choose "for lack of a better word." Thank you for your positive comments about our organization. We welcome you to join us.