Christianity

>>481247
Reread the stoics and then the gospel of John. The logos, or word, is a very much greek idea, but also comes to truth in Jesus Christ. Also realize that Christianity makes few claims that a specific ideology is 100% wrong, holding bits of truth. You can see this in the use of aristolean philosophy, especially in the middle ages.

>>481247
>As CS Lewis describes in "Mere Christianity", due to what Jesus says, there are only two ways to look at him, either a lunatic, or the actual Son of God sent to save us

How about as a legend? He could have just been a radical rabbi that people started making tall tales about. Sort of like how most historians think Hercules was a real person but he probably didn't go around telling people he battled Hydras.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKAHoYCWXF8

>>481247
Read Fear and Trembling by Kierkegaard
It will help you immensly

>>481247
CS Lewis needs to look up what a false dichotomy is then. There's possibilities other than just "Son of God" or "Crazy person".

How about just normal, boring mistaken? How about the possibility that ~90% of it is bullshit written by later people, and that Jesus was actually just a kinda cool guy but never said he was the Son of God?

Religion is all about 'unveiling' our true nature ie letting the veil tear apart or slip away;It is all there in the Gospels. There are things which people today deny but which will be more clearly understood (again) in the future.

The reliance on rationality is necessary and good, at least in the early stages of our public life, but we can and should eventually transcend rationality and even morality

>>481368
He could have also been a conman.

Why must God be personal op and on what grounds can you say that Jesus is special when that test of Lewis could be equally applied to Muhammad, Buddha or the founders of Jainism

>>481453
In general it seems like a lot of the religions, Christianity included think God would be like a person. Everything about being human is the result of evolution.

I beleive in some sort of higher power but the idea that it would "love you" or "forgive you" or "want to punish you" is just people projecting. Jesus cannot be God anymore than you or I can because God is something absolute, it's not "born" or "dies". Nor is the idea of sin possible, since a true God's laws would be absolute, there would be no way to break them. You can't "sin against God" any more than you can break the laws of physics or make 2+2=5

File: 1404163994200.png (545KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

545KB, 640x640px

>>481247
>God existing is more logical than God not existing

>>481247
>It just makes sense and seems more complete than Christianity
In what way?
>While I see something special in these philosophies
What special? You haven't told us anything, how could we possible help

>>481247
>I was exposed to deus vult memes, and so I became a Catholic
What the fuck OP.

File: arise.jpg (83KB, 587x960px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 587x960px

>>481247
OP, I had the exact same problem, but I had a slightly different conclusion, and followed the call of my Ancestors and became Asatru once again. It gives me the deep spiritual connection to the world I have always been looking for.

>>481453
Muhammad made claims that are historically inaccurate, and Buddha didn't exist. Don't know anything about Jainism founders but they're probably full of poop also. There

Please don't derail the thread with "Jesus didn't exist either :^)" memes

Also don't respond with "but he really didn't exist" meme.

>>481511
Jesus wasn't special either dude, he was not only full of shit but also didn't exist.

>>481522
He suffered an excruciating death at the hands of men. This was so you know that you are not alone in your own pain. Christ and with God as his father have been there too.

The resurrection shows that following Christ, you need no longer fear death. Following Christ and his teachings you are forgiven your sins (as you forgive others).

>>481522
There are contemporary Roman sources about him. He existed. Whether or not he was magic though is up for debate.

>>481511
>and Buddha didn't exist

He's considered a historical person. He is extremly well documented, more so than Jesus. Whether he actually did all the miracles that are written about him is up for debate though.

Looks like we have two miracles :^)

>>481537
>The resurrection
Proofs dude, and no your holy babble doesn't count.
>>481540
>Roman sources
Do tell more.

>>481522
Okay lets play a game

You name as many historians as you can that say He didn't exist and I'll name the ones that say He did exist

Suetonius, Josephus, Pliny the Younger, Tacitus, Gary Habermas, Sir William Ramsay, Bart Ehrman. I got 7, 5 if you take away the Christian ones.

Your turn
>>481542
>He's considered a historical person. He is extremly well documented, more so than Jesus.
You're uninformed or dishonest. Post names

>>481549
Anon, existence isn't backed by a number of people believing it to be such, that's not how it works.

>>481522
>didn't exist
Stop this meme immediately :^)

Arguments can be made against Moses, Buddha, etc... having existed, due to the actual texts about them having been written well later after their supposed life. But suddenly, around 30 CE, a bunch of people suddenly spread stories of the gospel and became a cult with particular teachings that couldn't come from nowhere. Someone had to appear to kickstart this movement, and there are no reasons to believe there couldn't have been a guy named Jesus (very common name) who claimed to be the messiah (he wouldn't be the first), spread particular teachings, and got himself executed. It would make less sense if no such person existed and a cult with specific teachings suddenly rose from nowhere.

>>481546
>Roman sources
Tacitus and Josephus.

>>481557
Historically, it kind of is

Lets not forget the gospels are considered historical biographical accounts by the majority of secular scholars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Mitchell_Ramsay
Although Ramsay was educated in the Tübingen school of thought (founded by F. C. Baur) which doubted the reliability of the New Testament, his extensive archaeological and historical studies convinced him of the historical accuracy of the New Testament.

>>481247
>I also browsed /pol/ a lot back then so I was exposed to deus vult memes, and so I became a Catholic
We don't want you.

>>481571
Jesus was not a common name

T. Yeshua

>>481452
Pretty Shit Conman tbf.
>Asks people to give shit to the poor, not him
>Surrenders to Authorities
>Gets Crucified

>>481549
>Scholars are hesitant to make unqualified claims about the historical facts of the Buddha's life. Most accept that he lived, taught and founded a monastic order during the Mahajanapada era during the reign of Bimbisara, the ruler of the Magadha empire, and died during the early years of the reign of Ajasattu, who was the successor of Bimbisara, thus making him a younger contemporary of Mahavira, the Jain tirthankara

Just go on wikipedia and read about the biographies.

This guy is more documented than Jesus. While Jesus's entire existence outside the bible consists of him being name dropped once or twice Buddah had entire biographies written about him. Buddah come from an extremely literate community which is why he is well documented, he has the same level of evidence of someone like Cesar.

>>481612
Are you saying Yeshua really wasn't a common name? Have I been lied to?

>>481632
I asked for names
>Just go to wikipedia
Kekt

>>481632
Are you new?
If you do not namedrop someone who said Buddha existed, he didn't exist, simple as that.

>>481413

this desu family

then read The Sickness Unto Death

>>481511
>Muhammad made claims that are historically inaccurate

So did the authors of the Gospels with regards to jewish culture and geography like in Mark.

>Buddha didn't exist

There isnt much credible evidence to support that. We have texts like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipavamsa as well as evidence of the family and peoples he came from.

>Don't know anything about Jainism founders but they're probably full of poop also. There

Thats not really a refutation anon.

>Please don't derail the thread with "Jesus didn't exist either :^)" memes

I didnt, I only stated that the test he thinks is unique to Jesus can be applied to others successfully as well.

>>481765
>So did the authors of the Gospels with regards to jewish culture and geography like in Mark.
cite example
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipavamsa
> The Dīpavaṃsa lauds the Theravāda as a "great banyan tree," and dismissively portrays the other early Buddhist schools as thorns (kaṇṭaka)
Doesn't sound historically biased at all
>as well as evidence of the family and peoples he came from.
cite example

>>481575

I don't doubt a preacher called Yeshua who was executed by the Romans existed but there are no reliable contemporary sources that indicate he did, nor would you expect there to be, nor is it a surprise that there aren't

IIRC Tacitus and Josephus were edited by early Christian monks as the passages dealing with Jesus are markedly different in style to the rest of the texts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3P183MNI7c

I'm just going to leave this here

>>481247
just cut out the middle man and go full mysticism already. exoteric religions are for plebs

>>481785
>IIRC Tacitus and Josephus were edited by early Christian monks

They were and this just shows how the whole religion is a joke. If I recall they added mentions of Jesus doing miracles when the origenal text mentioned nothing of the sort. Truth doesn't fear investigation, ergo the Christian account is not the truth.

>>481549
>Suetonius
Only gives evidence of their being Christians not Jesus and was born 50 ish years after Jesus's time

>Josephus
Born 4 years after Jesus died wrote his histories nearly 60 years later. The testimonim appeared much later and wasnt present in the days of Origen who even criticized him for not mentioning Jesus in his work. Likewise the whole paragraph is haphazardly inserted and the scholarly consensus is that its a forgery.

>Pliny the Younger
Only wrote about the existance of Christians not Jesus.

Meanwhile people who were contemporaries of the time made no reference to events such as the miracles associated with the resurrection darkness and earthquakes or even things like the Massacre of the Infants which somehow was left out of a hostile biography of herod.

Likewise Jesus ministry is also only in the gospels.

>>481844
From your standard, most historical figures and events did not happen

>>481779
>Mark makes serious mistakes in his geographical references to Palestine. He knows the Galilean place names
and the general relative positions of the localities, but not specific details. Hence he "represents Jesus as travelling back
and forth in Galilee and adjacent territories in a puzzling fashion" (Kee, 117, pp 102 - 3). To go (as Jesus is said to in Mk. 7:31) from the territory of Tyre by way of Sidon to the Sea of Galilee "is like travelling from Cornwall to London via Manchester" (Anderson, 2, p 192). Again, Mark’s references to movements across the Sea of Galilee are impossible to trace sequentially. Mention of specific location near the sea are either unknown sites, such as Dalmanutha (8:10), or are patently inaccurate, as in the designation of the eastern shore of the lake as the country of the Gerasenes (5:1)" (Kee, loc cit). Gerasa is more than thirty miles southeast of the lake, too far away for the setting of the story which demands a city in its vicinity, with a precipitous slope down to the water. Probably all that concerned Mark, collecting and adapting pre-existing stories about Jesus, was that the lake and its surrounding territories, some Jewish and some mainly Gentile, was an ideal setting for journey's of Jesus and his disciples, showing how both Jews and Gentiles responded to him with faith. That place names in Mark caused perplexity among early readers is shown by the wide range of variants in the textual tradition where names occur in the gospel. Perplexity is also evidenced by Matthew, who changed Mark’s Gerasenes to Gadarenes (Mt. 8:28), Gadara being a well-known spa only eight miles from the lake.

(G. A. Wells, The Historical Evidence for Jesus (Prometheus Books, 1982), p. 230

P1

>>481879
P2

Mark doesn't know Jewish divorce law.

In Mark 10:11-12, Jesus forbids divorce: 11 He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12 And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery."

Verse 12 implies that Mark believed women had a right of divorce in Jewish law. They did not.

Mark doesn't know ritual purity laws.

Mark says this in 7:3-4: 3 (The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. 4 When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.

These laws only applied to priests, not to Pharisees and not to "all the Jews."

The trial before the Sanhedrin

Jesus' trial before the Sanhedrin contains a number of procedural and legal errors. Each of the following details would have been in direct contradiction to Jewish law.

-Mark's trial is at night. The Sanhedrin was forbidden to hold trials at night.
-Mark's trial happens at the home of the high priest. The Sanhedrin was permitted to hold trials only in the Gazith Hall at the Temple.
-Mark's trial is held on Passover. This is perhaps the greatest implausibility of the story. -Jewish law absolutely forbid any such activity on high holy days or on the sabbath.
-Jesus is given a death sentence immediately. Jewish law required that a death sentence could not be pronounced until 24 hours after the trial.
-Mark has Jesus being convicted of blasphemy for claiming to be the Messiah:

>>481894
P3

Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Christ,[f] the Son of the Blessed One? 62 “I am, said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven. 63 The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses? he asked. 64 “You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think? They all condemned him as worthy of death (Mk 14:61-64)

Claiming to be the Messiah was in no way blasphemous nor any violation of Jewish law. The Jewish Messiah was (and is) not God. There is no way that a person claiming to be the Messiah could have been convicted of blasphemy.

>>481897

>There is no way that a person claiming to be the Messiah could have been convicted of blasphemy.

I know he's a meme, but Reza Aslan claims there were literally dozens of apocalyptic Jewish preachers executed in the first century who are all much better documented than Jesus

>>481779
>Doesn't sound historically biased at all
How does thier views on other schools suddenly mean that Buddha didnt exist?

>cite example

I cant produce on with my current sources that is external of religious text.

>>481850
>From your standard, most historical figures and events did not happen

Most historical figures and events are not rife with contradiction and mysterious absence.

>>481910
Do you have any links?

You seem like a gullible person

File: 0[1].jpg (10KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 480x360px

>>481247
>and I also browsed /pol/ a lot back then so I was exposed to deus vult memes, and so I became a Catholic
wololo

>>481247
>I realized that God existing is more logical than God not existing, and God would probably be a personal God
...How? How can anyone be so dense as to believe in a personal god? I kinda can understand the vague metaphysical version, but a personal deity? Do you not see how it's rubbish? Don't lie, anon; you didn't actually use logic. Oh well, whatever floats your boat.

File: tumblr_m63dqibMI91rvi7zuo1_400.jpg (38KB, 332x493px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 332x493px

>I also browsed /pol/ a lot back then so I was exposed to deus vult memes, and so I became a Catholic

>>481247
>I realized that God existing is more logical than God not existing, and God would probably be a personal God
What is your reasoning?

>>481498
Which ancestors? I have Christian ancestors and I have pagan ancestors. Which ancestors do I honor?

>>483471
>Which ancestors? I have Christian ancestors and I have pagan ancestors. Which ancestors do I honor?
The Pagan ones off course, the Christians where lead astray and prayed to false gods!

>>483425
He has none, he was a prothestant Christian before, just like his Parents, but he needed a catchy opening for his thread.
Nobody converts back to Christianity, but thats the wet dream of our fundamentalists friends, that the irreligious will come back to god one day...

>>481247
>I also browsed /pol/ a lot back then so I was exposed to deus vult memes, and so I became a Catolic.

Holy fuck. Literary converted by memes. It's hysterical funny and disgusting at the same time.

>>481247
>there are only two ways to look at him, either a lunatic, or the actual Son of God sent to save us. I don't think Jesus is a lunatic. So, now you see my conflict, and I just need some guidance on which way to go.

watch this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VOMFjQfJ8w

>>484064
>It's hysterical funny and disgusting at the same time.
And it is somewhat not credible.

File: schemamonk.jpg (50KB, 500x377px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 500x377px

>>481498

>All these Asatru pictures.

None of them every have anything written on them that is even remotely religious or counter to Christianity in any way.

Replace 'Gods' with 'God' in the last section and the Mjolnir with a Cross and it would work just the same.

>>485751

Oops, I see that this one mentions wights. I guess I am wrong.

>>485751
>Replace 'Gods' with 'God' in the last section and the Mjolnir with a Cross and it would work just the same.
Why not change to Asatru then, after all it is the same and it has this nice LOTR/LARP feeling to it.

>>485787

LOTR is a Christian book.

More importantly because I am a Christian and believe in the Trinity and in Jesus Christ. Religion isn't a joke to more nor is it an affection that I use to support my ideas about the world.

Asatru isn't the same as Christianity at all, when did I say it was? I said these images do not support any religion at all specifically in their words.

If you would like to read writings about Warriors that truly supports a specific religion (Christianity) then I would suggest reading this:

http://history.hanover.edu/courses/excerpts/344bern2.html

And if you would like to adopt some of the discipline of the Templars into your own Religious and lay life then here is their Rule:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_Rule

Also remember that the Templars have been fully exonerated of the false accusations against them in their trials, so please take a moment to pray for their souls and give them thanks for there immense sacrifices for Christendom and Pilgrims to the holy-land (of course, as with all things, they had their transgressions and greed at certain points but this doesn't take away from what they were based on and what they tried to live up to):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinon_Parchment

There are likely beings higher than us, but calling them gods is incorrect because they are merely higher up on the evolutionary scale than we are. There is nothing inherently "divine" about them. Some may seek to elevate us to their level by manifesting as humans (Or even creating new humans), which is where your prophets and messiahs fit in (Also the Greek concept of the logos). Some might demand worship, which could empower them in some way, which is where the idea of jealous/tyrannical deities comes in.

In the end, we have no idea. I think higher beings exist, and that some form of pure energy afterlife exists (As a higher plane of existence, perhaps the one these beings live on), but that's just me.

I do think that as time goes on, religions with "rigid" systems of belief like Christianity and Islam will fade away as more philosophically or scientifically grounded faiths take route. One domination may believe that higher beings exist and that they guide us, while another might believe they exist but ignore us, or even know nothing about us.

>>485751
which Darth is this again?

>>481247
>I realized that God existing is more logical than God not existing

Based on what?

>>489470
Based on his priest touching him

Good luck finding much on Cynic philosophy, considering that they didn't write anything down or have an orgainzed school

>>481582
grow a pair , what he fuck happened to you

>>483471
Do not worship the dead.

>>484047
Christians don't pray to false Gods, they pray to the Highest Power of them all. There are no false Gods in Christianity. All the Gods of the Pagans are to be respected and venerated in Christianity, but they are by there very definition not the One True God as there is simply put too many of them. The Trinity was a pagan aspect to it for sure by it is hyperdimensional entity beyond our ordinary understanding so what do you expect?

>>484052
I did and I know of many more who have done so. Maybe you were trying to make a different point from the one that you made idk.

>>484064
Memes are Gods work desu.

>>484080
That guy is a total fraud. No one with any logical understanding could possibly swallow any of the outright bullshit that emanates from that guys mouth.

>>484083
tips fedora.

>>481247
Christianity is based on the precepts of Stoicism. The whole turn the other cheek, love your enemy etc is kind of an extension of it that is also meant to bring about a great spiritual experience in the practitioner. Christianity I feel should be practiced in conjunction with Stoicism, or even some of the basic ideas of Buddhism which is the same thing. But neither Buddhism nor Stoicism will work on their own.

The basic thinking is that while we must seek to control our base desires as well as our reactions to both positive and negative stimuli, at least over the long term, we need to call upon a high power in order to do so, because the flesh is weak. If that higher power is Odin, Krishne, or Buddha and this is what helps you fine. But, if you have already started along the path of Christ and properly understood it then you should not reject him.

File: 1450918212619.jpg (15KB, 244x255px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 244x255px

>>481247
>I realized that God existing is more logical than God not existing
If I had a fedora, I'd tip it.

>>490538
>bunch of people saying this
>no responses from OP
:^)

>>481879
>To go (as Jesus is said to in Mk. 7:31) from the territory of Tyre by way of Sidon to the Sea of Galilee "is like travelling from Cornwall to London via Manchester"

he was on a 3 and a half year missionary journey. the gospels don't contain every single event in Jesus' life. it seems pretty logical he would have been visiting all sorts of villages and towns "off route", to spread his word
>Verse 12 implies that Mark believed women had a right of divorce in Jewish law. They did not.
you can't assume implications.

>These laws only applied to priests, not to Pharisees and not to "all the Jews."
he's probably stating that the Pharisees and the Jews of that time were in fact holding to the tradition of the priests, not that Mark doesn't know purity laws

>The Sanhedrin was forbidden to hold trials at night
it wasn't a usual trial. maybe they wanted to hold it away from a huge multitude of his followers
>Mark's trial happens at the home of the high priest. The Sanhedrin was permitted to hold trials only in the Gazith Hall at the Temple.
maybe the Sanhedrin didn't follow the correct procedure. arresting the potential messiah isn't a typical event. if you're ever going to not follow procedure it would be for an event like this
>Jesus is given a death sentence immediately.
same point
>Claiming to be the Messiah was in no way blasphemous nor any violation of Jewish law.
it's pretty clear they wanted Jesus killed. going by the letter of the law wasn't the main thing on their mind.. the main thing on their mind was to find Jesus guilty and kill him

>>481247
>>490503
Another thing which is kind of important, but that I forgot to mention in the last post, is that the legend or the story of Christ had to happen on the Earth; given the bizarre nature of reality, our physical mortal existence, spacetime and openendedness of history, the weird mystery of albeogenesis and the unknowable nature of matter itself, it is clear that things are not really as they appear. In order for us to have any hope for the future an event like the resurrection had to take place to show us that this world is but an illusion and escape is inevitable.

I was an atheist for about twelve years and during that time I brainwashed myself into disbelieving in God like a good little SJW. This still makes it difficult for me to fully parse certain religious truths which ought to be self evident. That is why I believe it is so important to start back on the path of faith in this world, as by the time it comes to face it in the next your inner-momentum might prevent you from resonating with God and you might have a more difficult time of things than others.

>>481247
>>490586

>continued

One of the things that amazes me about people who lack faith, and about myself too when I was an atheist, is how many atheists love science fiction and movies like Star Wars, but are over-looking the real life story of a Chosen One prophecied to come and save the human race from dark synergies. A man whose prophecies have already mostly been fulfilled and who is connected to an all-powerful inter-dimensional entity called the Logos.

There are bright shining temples just down the road from your house but your fail to walk in there every Sunday morning to commune with the light of a multidimensional non-corporeal information based lifeform called the Holy Spirit or Logos. There is a literal Star Wars holy book (the New and Old Testaments) filled with prophecies sitting on a shelf in your room right now, but you fail to even see it as such. If you love this kind of thing in story books and films the question is: Why don't you love it in real life? Given our own perpetual blindness to the nature of reality it is likely that we are blind to this most obvious and magnificent of truths also.

The question is not why should you believe in God. It is: Why aren't you?

File: dank_memes.png (824KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

824KB, 1024x576px

>>481247
>I also browsed /pol/ a lot back then so I was exposed to deus vult memes, and so I became a Catholic.
I honestly think you should just join the church of dank memes.

>>481452
>>481622
This

Muhammad and Joseph Smith had everything to gain from making up their respective religions

>>481453
Please, keep the debate between christian theology and ancient philosophy. You can fuck off the /pol/ with your atheism memes.
We are just trying to keep things interesting.

>>490750
Jesus got glory and meaning from believing he could actually be the Messiah.

>>490750
Muhammad lived a very austre life and certainly didnt have people use hideously expensive oil to wash his feet. Not only that he was horribly persecuted and attacked by the Pagan Arabs.

>>481453
Jesus is enormously significant. The Jews tried to get the Gentiles to become interested in their religion following the destruction of Israel and the Temple, but they were like 'nah, we don't need it'. The problem was Judaism was a dead religion by that stage.

Christianity not only reformed Judaism which had become toxic, but also opened it up to a whole new group of people, including the very logically minded Greeks.

Greek philosophising had a massive impact on Christianity and is the reason why the Christian religion is the most logical and consistent religous world view there is.

Jesus fulfilled the prophecies of Judaism and also brought the idea of the religion forwards into something that most Jews are still incapable of accurately comprehending.

Muhammad brought nothing significant to the ethos or the debate. In fact by denying the divinity of Christ, Islam brought the whole thing back down to the level of Judaism again, and this regression has merely continued unabated amongst the Arabs to the point that they have degenerated today.

Buddhism is fine, but no more remarkable than Stoicism or any number of other philosophical movements and its complete lack of any ground to stand means that it requires less enlightened (completely dark) mysticism to fill in the gaps. This makes it largely unfulfilling as a philosophy.

And Jainism is, as evidenced by the fact that no one knows or really gives a toss about it, irrelevant, as if it had something to revival Christianity or Buddhism or anything new to say on either of them it would have done so several hundred years ago.

>>490785
>Please, keep the debate between christian theology and ancient philosophy. You can fuck off the /pol/ with your atheism memes.

Not a single meme in this post, and those are two questions that are very relevant to the OP.

The first is important as the question of how or if God is personal has very serious consequences for what constitutes virtue for stoics likewise it also can refute things like Epicureanism.

The second question is important as the Lewis dilemma is the core to OPs accepting Jesus's divinity.

Though I certainly understand you fear of memes given the OP literally converted because of them.

>>490824
Literally none of your post deals with the questions raised in my one. You ignore them and go on argue about your ideas of significance, was your post meant for another anon?

>>490813
>austere life
>twelve wives

>>481247

>I was blind and now I can see

said every proselytiser ever.

Is 4chan Christianity a big thing? I feel like the Christians who browse here are basically a denomination themselves, almost.

>>490847
Yes I reread your question and realised that the question I was responding to was much better than the one you asked, because the question you asked made absolutely no sense. It is simple enough to deduce the fallacy you made and, nevertheless, if you read what I wrote it will probably help to edify to the exact nature of your current cognitive difficulties on this subject.

>>490887

It's the new edgy thing for contrarians who feel themselves to the >le neckbear meme

there are probably one or two actual, sincere Christians, but since religious folk are almost immune to irony, they play a straight bat.

File: These are the people telling you to tip your fedora.png (3MB, 4784x3228px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4784x3228px

>>490887

>>490894
>Yes I reread your question and realised that the question I was responding to was much better than the one you asked, because the question you asked made absolutely no sense.

An understandable mistake see here >>490827 for a clarification of their relevance if you still dont understand them I can break it down further.

>It is simple enough to deduce the fallacy you made
Which fallacy was that?

>>490908
Oh I see. Good work. Yes by all means break that down.

>the personal God having consequences for the concept of virtue for the Stoics.

>>490948
>Yes by all means break that down.
No worries

>the personal God having consequences for the concept of virtue for the Stoics.

I see it as being a very important question as there being personal God firstly will change the way we determine what is a virtue and what is not as revelation becomes a key source of information rather than say deducing it through reason alone like the Greeks did. Secondly and quite importantly the presence of a personal God means that there would be a whole host of new virtues like submission and trust to the divine, dedication to ritual and the like.

Was that the only point you would like to clarify/expand?

>>490485

This is what the Bible actually says about worshiping other gods.


Deuteronomy 16:6-11

6 If anyone secretly entices you—even if it is your brother, your father’s son or[b] your mother’s son, or your own son or daughter, or the wife you embrace, or your most intimate friend—saying, “Let us go worship other gods,” whom neither you nor your ancestors have known, 7 any of the gods of the peoples that are around you, whether near you or far away from you, from one end of the earth to the other, 8 you must not yield to or heed any such persons. Show them no pity or compassion and do not shield them. 9 But you shall surely kill them; your own hand shall be first against them to execute them, and afterwards the hand of all the people. 10 Stone them to death for trying to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. 11 Then all Israel shall hear and be afraid, and never again do any such wickedness.

>>490900
The lack of sincerity is disgusting

>>490969
Thank you Good Sir!

You might say a bit on who it refutes Epicureanism, but I'm fairly happy with as it is.

>>490980
Lel. Deuteronomy; the Old Testament. That has nothing to do with the New Testament and what it teaches. The Old Testament is obsolete that's why it's called the OLD Testament.

Read Romans, the first couple of chapters. It has all the information on the New Covenant view on the subject of the other Gods.

>>491124
>You might say a bit on who it refutes Epicureanism, but I'm fairly happy with as it is.

No problem, it refutes Epicureanism as firstly it refutes the materialism that underpins it and secondly it (at least in almost all religions) destroys the idea of pleasure being the highest good.

Also would you be able to outline the fallacy in my post from before you were talking of?

>>491144
Thanks again!

Well I think I misunderstood the intentions of your post, perhaps that was the intention. But to answer your question.

>on what grounds can you say that Jesus is special when that test of Lewis could be equally applied to Muhammad, Buddha or the founders of Jainism

The second half of Lewis's test (pertaining to Jesus being the Son of God) could hardly apply to Muhammad, who is merely a prophet for the Muslims, Buddha who is a man first and foremost and Jaininism IIRC doesn't feature a human deity.

i thought your intention was to get OP to look in every which direction but Christ, which I didn't understand your motivation for. Christianity is, in my opinion, as good as any other religion. Better, in fact, and I should know as I studied and practiced most of the other prominent ones for many years.

>>491212
>i thought your intention was to get OP to look in every which direction but Christ, which I didn't understand your motivation for. Christianity is, in my opinion, as good as any other religion. Better, in fact, and I should know as I studied and practiced most of the other prominent ones for many years.

I get you now.

>The second half of Lewis's test (pertaining to Jesus being the Son of God) could hardly apply to Muhammad, who is merely a prophet for the Muslims, Buddha who is a man first and foremost and Jaininism IIRC doesn't feature a human deity.

The aim of that part of my post was to show OP the problem of relying on such a "proof" as people can be sincere and suffer greatly for a cause without that cause being correct or them being mad. Which is why very few faithful Christians or converts honestley have this argument being important to them. By trying to get the OP to apply this test elsewhere ill either demonstrate its faults as a proof or allow him to overcome it and have greater certainty in it as a proof.

> I should know as I studied and practiced most of the other prominent ones for many years.

That sounds interesting can you tell us about that?

>>490900
>that guy who says "I don't care about being right"
Sums you guys up pretty well, I'd think.

>>491255
Started off as a Roman Catholic
Became an atheist at twelve
Then I got into Shaminism at about age 21; lucid dreaming, hallucinogenics and magic
Then I had read VALIS, and about eight months later I had a kind of spiritual crisis similar to what happened to PKD in that book.
Got heavily into Gnosticism, Tibetan Buddhism and Christianity after that.
Now at 32 my main focus is Christianity, as I find it to be the most complex and interesting confluence of history and philosophy. I find the relationship between the Old Testament and the New Testament to be interesting both from an historical and geo-political point of view. And the nuances of Christ's teachings the complex make up of the prophecies involved appeal to me both on an intellectual, philosophical and spiritual basis I now find impossible to ignore. I feel bad that I ever strayed from the deep mysteries of Christianity in my youth, but I feel that I lacked then the level of maturity required to really give it a proper go, and being rather skeptical in my youth it took an actual encounter with the Living God to fully persaude me of its reality.

>Alright /his/, after a long time being an atheist, I realized that God existing is more logical than God not existing,

translation: i couldn't handle the fedora/reddit banter and decided to stop being logical so i could have the approval of muh secret anime club

File: 1393019484695.jpg (32KB, 479x317px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 479x317px

>>481247
>I also browsed /pol/ a lot back then so I was exposed to deus vult memes, and so I became a Catholic

>>492812

Yes, and at 40 you will grow totally disillusioned and move on to the next fad of the week

>>490900
Holy shit people here can be spineless

>>490887
It's not 4chan. It's kinda a worldwide thing right now.

People strive for culture, family and commune.
Atheism cannot provide that ever since the Eastern Block fell.

In the end it's just as easy to say you're a Christian or a Muslim as it is to say you're an atheist. All you have to do is be a bad Muslim or a bad Christian, if you're that degenerate.
And people from religious families with doubts would simply remain doubtful but part of the religion just for the communal part.

>wants to fit in with ebin pol friends
>idiot 'finds god'

For fuck's sake, man.

Why is the Old Testament so boring? The second half of Exodus is literally just God listing Materials and Measurements for some shit he wants built, and all of Leviticus is him saying the same shit over and over about animals and wiping some blood. The four gospels are the retelling of the same guys life 4 times over and they're 10 times more interesting than this

File: 1417974889660.jpg (83KB, 736x490px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 736x490px

>I should go now quietly
>because my bones have found a place to lie down and sleep,
>where all my layers can become reeds,
>all my limbs can become trees,
>all my children can become me,
>what a mess I leave
>to follow

>>493351
Because it's basically the bronze age mythology of the Jews.

You'll find most mythology from that period (as well as the iron age) has this weird emphasis on incredibly long lists. Irish mythology is a nightmare for it

Why is the Old Testament important for Christians?

>>493438

Because it's got a talking donkey in it. Christians love that shizzle.

>>493351
It is boring. Parts of Exodus are cool because they deal with magical things like the manna from heaven, Aaron's rod, the plagues, smoky Yahweh on Sinai and the ark of the covenant, but it's mostly pretty boring. The wisdom books like Proverbs and Ecclesiastes are the most interesting. Even the NT is dull, apart from Revelation which is pretty out there.

>>493658

I think the NT suffers from a tragic lack of dinosaurs. It would be better with a T-Rex and some Velociraptors in it.