ChristFags explain this shit to me

File: Bug..easyonthecarrots.png (249KB, 248x459px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 248x459px

>>9814612

Bugs

>>9814612
The answer to your questions, sorry to say, is "Start with the greeks"

God is the self's awareness of itself. Nothing more or less. The bible is important for understanding the history of the western world, but not as a guide to behavior. It was great for keeping the gullible in line but so is an alcoholic father threatening to beat you with a belt. That doesn't mean that father has anything to teach you about how to think and behave. Society is falling apart not because we've lost track of the correct way to be, but because there's too many of us with too inflated a sense of our domain and what kind of lifestyle we're entitled to.

>>9814677

So you don't have an answer for me is what you're saying?

>>9814612
>Empirical evidence basically goes against every claim made by Abrahamic religions
You have already been thoroughly brainwashed by the technocratic and narcissistic modern mass media, you're lost.

Divine Character

All good people share the same character
God has it, Jesus had it, I think the holy spirit is it and more...

>>9814712
Good ideas, truths, etc, are such because they endure scrutiny. Refusing to examine an idea (ie: faith) doesn't make it a good one, it makes you refuse to thing. Christianity is an excuse to deny the existential uncertainty that the adult world forces upon all of us. Evolution factually happens, the earth is billions of years old, energy cannot be created or destroyed, and you're an idiot.

>>9814712

That's not really an answer.

How do we know that the story of creation is only a metaphor? If it's so obvious now why was it not so obvious before?

File: 1426283581146.jpg (29KB, 576x510px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 576x510px

>>9814726

>>9814612
>Empirical evidence basically goes against every claim made by Abrahamic religions.
wrong

>Do the pious never think about these things?
no, of course not. you are a singularly enlightened genius

>Imagine if all Bibles were indestructible.
really makes me think

>>9814732
Dude, just start with the Greeks, there's no easy answer for your questions.

>>9814736

Can you only speak in quirky comebacks or did you want to say something substantial here?

We know the spirit bro.
Books don't tell us that God exists.

>>9814612
>it just wasn't clear until science proved us wrong
This is a modern Protestant phenomenon.
People have viewed the OT as allegorical since Christianity's conception:
For who that has understanding will suppose that the first, and second, and third day, and the evening and the morning, existed without a sun, and moon, and stars?... I do not suppose that anyone doubts that these things figuratively indicate certain mysteries, the history having taken place in appearance, and not literally.
t. Origen of Alexandria c. 200 A.D.

>Why do natural disasters constantly fuck with people's livelihood ( Mostly the more religious countries and regions I might add) and how is that necessary?
This is just the problem of evil.

>Like, Imagine if all Bibles were indestructible. That would be the fucking checkmate atheists right?
Matthew 16:4 - “An evil and unfaithful generation seeks a sign, but no sign will be given it except the sign of Jonah.”

Consider that almost the entirety of the Old Testament is prophesy for the Passion: the Pentateuch main themes are God's desire to be with man and the need for salvation, Jonah spends 3 days in the belly of the whale to foretell Christ descending to hell, God commands Abraham to bind Isaac to test his loyalty (illustrating that to being willing send your son to die as the Father did is the ultimate sign of love), etc.

I'm not saying that any portion of the Old Testament happened or didn't happen, but the significance just remains the same.

Memes are shit. I think we can all agree on that. They were acceptable, like, 5-or-so years ago. Essentially they were slightly amusing inside jokes on the internet. Of course, at the height of their popularity (around 2010 - 2012), they started appearing everywhere; not just on the internet but occasionally on TV or in video games and movies. Your friends, coworkers and classmates would laugh at memes now. And they weren't funny anymore. This site is testament to that fact.

So who's to blame?

Well, mainly sites like Reddit, Memebase, 9gag, etc. And I'm not just saying that because it's cool to hate on those sites; they all spread shitty memes like a cancerous growth in a survivor of the Chernobyl disaster. These websites are where memes went to die, in a way.

But you can't blame them entirely, really. It's human nature to want to fit in with everyone else, and if everyone else likes memes, then you should probably check 'em out, too! And you did, and you laughed for a while, or at least pretended to. And then, when people finally bored of memes, which was inevitable, people started to dislike them. And then hate them.

So here we are, in 2016, and it is now a social norm (at least on the internet) to mock and hate memes because they're so mainstream. The ultimate irony is that hating memes is now mainstream. And yes, while I do personally think memes are shitty and should die a horrible death, and Reddit, 9gag and Memebase are all terrible, I feel the same way about the stupid people who think they're being cool and funny by making faux-channels called shit like "le epic reddit mememaster" with an avatar of a fedora neckbeard guy, spamming comments like "redditors unite!" in an "ironic" sense.

>>9814759
Didn't the catholic church take it literally for many years? You know, during that angelology phase?

>This is just the problem of evil.
I know.

>Matthew 16:4 - “An evil and unfaithful generation seeks a sign, but no sign will be given it except the sign of Jonah.”

So basically god's answer to "Hey, could I get some proof here" is "fuck you that's evil/just have faith bro".

>>9814768

Is this some new copypasta that I'm not aware of?

>>9814811
Catholics are pagans.

File: greetingscitizens.jpg (151KB, 700x1690px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 700x1690px

>>9814707
OP, start with the Greeks. Ask yourself: how did a Jewish messiah cult go from scratching a living in the desert to a force of education and service throughout the early middle ages and up to the present? It is a radical transformation, and one that is little understood today. What happened? How did the Platonists create Christian philosophy, the metaphor of the Christ, and install the form of the good as something for man to emulate? Matthew 5:48 Be perfect on earth as your Father in heaven is perfect. Matthew is one of the synoptic gospels. The New Testament is Socratic parable retold as moral instruction. Did a man ever walk on water? Did he really make two fish and a few loaves feed five thousand? Or is it a metaphor? And what is a fish but a man caught by the interior life? How is a fisher of men like Jesus alike to God, the first being-in-itself and unknowable? Ask Jung. Ask your shadow.

Remember that there was no Christianity before the supposed Resurrection. Jesus died on a cross, the cross we are all on. Of course his message was heresy in the ears of a corrupt Sanhedrin. The messiah was shut down, but he was indeed resurrected by his later students. It wasn't until Nicea and Augustine who anthropomorphised God into a Deity that the message of love was lost amid bowing and scraping and "right practice."

>Why is it that a Bible can burn like any other book?
It is a book.

>Why can it be tempered with and mistranslated?
This is a failure of man and language.

>That would be the fucking checkmate atheists right?
Atheists are unimportant.

File: miracle2005-10.jpg (70KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 500x400px

>>9814612
>For starters, Empirical evidence basically goes against every claim made by Abrahamic religions.

Nope.

>>9814832
Continuing on, don't worry too much about how you or later Catholics (or Protestants) misinterpret the book. Your anguish is based in their misunderstanding. Just reject it and move on. Read the material yourself. Start with the Greeks.

>>9814811
>Didn't the catholic church take it literally for many years? You know, during that angelology phase?

I'm not that anon but I will tell you that a literal interpretation of angels, or repeating the nonsensical fantasy of an ancient, is braindead wrong. The church lost its reason a long, long time ago. Theologians developed a Christian cosmology by dissecting the Bible literally, and have been wrangling with their own misconceptions ever since. Read them, but ignore them. They aren't thinking clearly, and burdened by nonsense dogma.

>>9814832

I know it's a book and I know it's the failure of human language. Which begs the question: Why did god ,despite his omnipotence, chose to make his message heard in the most unreliable way possible? A message, I might add, that could be the difference between an eternity of suffering and an eternity in heaven.


>Atheists are unimportant.

How so? Isn't every human gods children? How are they unimportant? How am I unimportant?

>>9814677
Sorry but the New Testament offers a very sound moral system. Some of the teaching are very deep and timeless truths

File: pope-fish-hat-1.jpg (60KB, 550x348px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 550x348px

>How would anybody be able to argue against god's existence if the Bible was made out of something entirely unique that broke the laws that bind the rest of the material world. It would set itself a part from other religious texts and be impossible to argue against.

>Matthew 7
Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’”

Read as: A human being does not test the generator of all things. The generator of all things uses the human to explore its own infinity.

>And what is a fish but a man caught by the interior life?
Pic related.

>>9814811
>So basically god's answer to "Hey, could I get some proof here" is "fuck you that's evil/just have faith bro".
No, God's answer is the consistent written accounts and oral tradition of Christ's resurrection and the martyrdom of the Apostles and the rest of Christ's disciples.

Like anything else, people will believe what they want to convince themselves of. Most would rather try to escape the tenets of unwavering love/selflessness/charity than to soften their heart.

File: maps.jpg (16KB, 260x326px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 260x326px

>>9814612
Read Maps of Meaning. There is a free pdf online.

>>9814612
not shitposting here, go eat some shrooms with this on your mind and new doors of understanding and research into this topic will be opened for you, there is more to the "holy spirit" than you can normally pick up on

File: corinth5-17.jpg (134KB, 747x1328px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 747x1328px

>>9814875
Let me rephrase. The status of you being atheist is unimportant. It does not make you better or worse than me. And the creator would have no opinion as far as I can tell.

For me, however, atheist is just another word for ignorant. Which is why you started this thread with so many good questions I guess, so good on you.

>chose to make his message
>his message
God is not a person.

>could be the difference between an eternity of suffering and an eternity in heaven
This is not what you think it is. Now is the moment of salvation. There is no heaven or hell but what you find in this life. Pic related. Read it carefully and keep my other posts about a metaphorical Christ in mind.

>>9814915
I've read Terence Mckenna, so I'm already interested in trying DMT. Just don't know where to get some, not something your standard weed dealer carries with him,

>>9814895

Isn't that faulty reasoning? The Bible is true because the Bible says so?

Go to /pol/
Watch Jordan Peterson
Go to the Christianity generals on /pol/
Go to your local church

Deus Vult and praise kek

This thread is so sad. The masses of humanity of may never understand Christianity. They'll only know the fairy tale version, and the corruption of mortal churches.

>>9814915
don't do this, you fucking degenerate unless you want false idol.

The scripture is not literal, as in the major thing you are supposed to get from it is not about what things are, but what to do. The world presented in it is one of value and action, not a cold scientific description.

How is that valuable? As you said, the entire western civilization rests on it, our world view and morality is entirely Christian. You even have atheists being incredulous that somebody might need God to tell them what is wrong and what is right, while they act out the Christian value system completely without realizing it.
Now look at communism or fascism, ideologies based completely on rational thought - they proved themselves utterly unfeasible and failed within a few generations. The smilingly primitive and irrational civilizations like the Egyptian or Sumerian actually managed to last thousands of years.

>>9814947
Read the Meditations.

>>9814984
clearly havent done it, have you?

File: 1500333363886.png (5KB, 202x236px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 202x236px

>>9814980
I hope you're not trying to deny the Resurrection, Anon.

>>9814947
Where did I say that?
They asked what evidence God has given, the accounts of the death and resurrection of Christ in the canonical gospels are evidence. In addition the fact that the Apostles and the disciples volunteered to be crucified for their writings should lend evidence to their veracity.

>>9814968
cringe

>>9814993
no, because I'm not a degenerate drug user. fucking redpill yourself and don't be foolwed by phony gods

File: 1500993154171.jpg (13KB, 250x337px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 250x337px

>>9815004

>>9814986
>Read the Meditations.

Give me a quick summary or at least tell me what I should be looking for in there.

>>9815017
Go. Read. Descartes. Now.

failure to do so will forever brand you as a pseud

>>9815001

>the accounts of the death and resurrection of Christ in the canonical gospels are evidence.

No, they are not...

>>9815004
>t. pseud
then you have absolutely no room to talk about the subject, there is nothing phony about it retard

>>9815033
They're accounts of events. Why trust, say, Herodotus and not trust the Gospels?

File: 1501151770626.jpg (48KB, 640x416px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 640x416px

>>9814612
>From my point of view, It's just seems so silly to believe that a god that would communicate his message the same way a normal human would. Through fragile and vulnerable sheets of paper stacked together that have to be transported and often time poorly translated in many languages.

If you're interested in exploring this, I suggest you start with the Resurrection, as there is a surprisingly strong case to be made for it.

Some suggested reading here: http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/134814184/#134820661

>I kinda want to believe in god but...I'm having a few mental blocks.

Consider this. What's the alternative? That everything evolved out of nothing? How plausible is that?

On the other hand, one can entertain the idea of believing in God. A God who could create a Mozart and a Shakespeare, the complexities of your own psyche, and body ("fearfully and wonderfully made" is an apt description), pic related, and the earth in all its complexity and beauty.

What kind of God can do that? A God something greater than which the mind cannot conceive, perhaps?

But then there's problem of evil.

>Why do natural disasters constantly fuck with people's livelihood ( Mostly the more religious countries and regions I might add) and how is that necessary?

Aye, there's the rub. And too, there is the problem of salvation history -- why did God choose the particular and peculiar methods he did?

Along these lines, you might try something like Introduction to Christianity by Josef Ratzinger. It's rather a good book that spends its opening chapter addressing the issue of modern skepticism, with the kind of beautiful analysis and comprehension that's characteristic of Ratzinger, a world-class theologian.

I can't find that chapter online, but here is his treatment of the article of the creed "descended into hell."

http://castelotscripture.com/descent-into-hell-pope.pdf

>Thus the article about the Lord's descent into hell reminds us that not only God's speech but also his silence is part of the Christian revelation. God is not only the comprehensible word that comes to us; he is also the silent, inaccessible, uncomprehended, and incomprehensible ground that eludes us. To be sure, in Christianity there is a primacy of the logos, of the word, over silence; God has spoken. God is word. But this does not entitle us to forget the truth of God's abiding concealment.

Finally, anon, don't forget to pray, and ask God (even if you're not sure you believe in God) for the gift of faith. Draw near to God and He will draw near to you. Pray God to lead you forward, step by step, even if the steps are very small. The frustration you express in starting this thread may itself be the product of God's grace working within you - a vexing grain of sand. Pray Him to lead you forward. "Lead kindly light, lead Thou me on."

File: 1500473363626s.jpg (4KB, 206x219px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 206x219px

>>9814733
>le fedora meme
not an argument. what is it with the flood of retarded christcucks? christians used to be one of the better classes of ppl on this board

File: feelsbrainsaijin.png (77KB, 372x300px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 372x300px

>>9814996
I do deny it. The ghost of Jesus is a metaphor. His coming to Saul is an allegorical retelling of the foundation of the Catholic church. His words to Mary Magdalene in John 20:17 who recognized him after the resurrection: "noli me tangere." Do not cling to me. ie, Do not cling to the myth, listen to the word of the apostles. The passage from Corinthians I posted above: >>9814921.

>"So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. ... We are therefore Christ's ambassadors"

Jesus may have been a man, and a messiah. The Sanhedrin condemned him and he died for his heresy. But his example became a light to the world, through the apostles and later philosophers (1st para. here: >>9814832). That was his resurrection, and in no way literal.

File: foucault.jpg (156KB, 740x464px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 740x464px

>>9815035
Nothing can be objectively proven. Evidence? pfft

>>9815034
>>9815014
>yeah, epic dude this drug that has been scientifically shown to rearrange brain cells and distort reality totally showing me the truth about reality
drugs like this gave us the hippies who gave us feminism, sjw bullshit and the civil rights act. it was created by a jew.

>>9815035
Because Herodotus can be proven or disproven. I've never seen a furry gold-digging ant, but Herodotus thought he did. I've never seen a man walking on water outside of my boat, but the apostles did. You've got to at least pretend you have a functioning brain in your head come on now.

>>9815051
That's not what Paul says.

>But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is worthless, and so is your faith. In that case, we are also exposed as false witnesses about God. For we have testified about God that He raised Christ from the dead, but He did not raise Him if in fact the dead are not raised.

>For if the dead are not raised, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If our hope in Christ is for this life alone, we are to be pitied more than all men.

>>9815035

I'm pretty sure Historians don't blindly believe Herodotus and his claims.

But what about the Quran? It has its own claims, doesn't it? What makes those so different from the ones in the Bible?

>>9815061
I'm almost happy that you'll never do it. We need proles, too, after all.

>>9815068
Because Muhammad was a false prophet. The Bible warns against this.

>>9815061
>hurr reality is objective
you have an outdated understanding of consciousness, pseud

>>9815062
You've never seen Hannibal Barca, yet you probably trust his existence and historical career based on an account from over 50 years after his death.

>>9815061
>mushrooms were created by jews

you are literally retarded

>>9814811
>Didn't the catholic church take it literally for many years? You know, during that angelology phase?
No, this is pure mythology. Read some Christian thinkers.

>>9815073

No, but you see Jesus was not the son of god and was only a precursor of Mohammed. The Quran tells us of this.

Honest mistake.

>>9815068
>>9815095

"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them."

Christianity has given us the Western Civilization. Islam has given us... hmm.. must be something...

>>9815051

You seem interesting. What's your take on Gnosticism?

>>9815100

Humanism gave us western civilization. Christianity gave us burning at the stake.

>>9815065
Why do you suppose the books say he was called Christos? The anointed one, in Greek. My other post here >>9815051 is hinting pretty strongly that the apostles invented the resurrected Christ myth, AND its own antidote should people not understand the hidden meaning. Their idea of a body, immortal soul or intellect, and connection to a heavenly being correlates perfectly with Neoplatonist ideas of the time. The apostles (Paul et al) dispensed their philosophy using the Christ as a vehicle. What do you think they were doing, but running around everywhere and spreading their wisdom? Later theologians fetishized the he-was-a-man myth and fucked it all up, and now we've got OP asking why an OT style anthropomorphic deity doesn't make His books indestructible.

>>9815068
Muhammad probably said what the Qur'an and various hadith states. Yet there is no reason to believe what his teachings were true. What Muhammad taught is antithetical to the old and new testament. No one even purports to any miracle or sign that reveals him to be a true prophet, unlike Christ.

>>9815113
Look at this guy, with one bold statement he proved Nietzsche and the rest of philosophy completely wrong

>>9815116
I should add that under this system the soul/intellect was believed to return to the unknowable at time of death. A man whose soul did not return but stayed, Bodhisattva-like, to teach his fellow man is exactly the Marvel capeshit people would have gobbled up.

>>9815116
That's nonsense. Christ's resurrection as a literal thing is as old as Christianity itself.

File: 1490606549910.jpg (74KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 1024x576px

>>9815103
Gnosticism is a big area. I subscribe to Plotinus, who believed there was no such thing as evil in the world. Only the absence of good. Like being on the bad end of Aristotle's golden mean. I haven't thoroughly compared the two though. It is too easy to understand evil as an object, rather than the absence of responsible right action (which is difficult to do, or even perceive in the moment).

>>9815124

Wasn't the Quran written when god whispered it into his ears? Seems like a pretty good sign to me.

>>9814736
This was embarrassing and just betrays how insecure about your beliefs you really are.

>>9815149
No, it spoken by Muhammad after supposed divine inspiration however it was not written down until a number of years later.

>>9815161
Oh, really? Tell me, why do you believe in empirical evidence? What reason do you have to believe that the world is rational and comprehensible by the human mind? That's right, the idea of God stands at the roots of empirical idea itself.

rly mks me thnk

>>9815140
Of course it is. The apostles wrote it that way. They specifically wrote that he looked and felt just like he did in life. They say he was really real in life again, before apotheosis. This was a huge mistake on their part. Generations of philosophers, believers and laymen that followed latched onto the mystical part of the story rather than the message of the Christ figure and redemption of the individual in this life. Read >>9814921 again. Be reconciled to God, not the figure the apostles used to illustrate God's greatness. Set that one aside.

>>9815166

Yes, but the Quran says that it was the word of god though? How can you even argue with evidence like that? That's bloody airtight. Like the Bible claiming all those things happened despite no historian documenting those monumental events.

>>9815065
>1 Corinthians 15:12-19

There are very few serious Bible scholars who dispute that 1 Corinthians was written by Paul, and that it was written in the early to mid 50s AD.

In chapter 15, Paul refers to a very early creed which he had passed on to the Corinthians. Its clauses are all marked by the word *that*:

>For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received,
>that Christ died for our sins in accordance
with the Scriptures,
>that he was buried,
>that he was raised on the third day in
accordance with the scriptures,
>and that he appeared to Cephas (Peter),
then to the twelve...

Those four thats enshrine a precious kernel of Christian belief from the very earliest days of the church. Paul reminds the Corinthians that he had told them all this when he first evangelized them (circa AD 49).

But it was much older than that. He tells us that he received it when he was converted, which was at least fifteen years earlier (see Galatians 1:18, 2:1). We are getting back perilously close to the resurrection itself if we are forced to place Paul's conversion somewhere in the mid-30s AD.

But Paul still has not finished. In the words "I delivered... I received" (1 Cor 15:3) he is using the language of received tradition and its transmission. In other words, the resurrection creed he cites here was already traditional in Christian circles before Paul became a Christian. It takes us back to the very first days of the church.

There's not much chance for legend and embellishment to have crept in here.

C.S. Lewis was, initially at least, a most reluctant convert to Christianity. A respected professor of literature at Oxford, when he became convinced of the existence of God in his early thirties he began an intensive study of various world religions. Of the New Testament he wrote: "I was by now too experienced in literary criticism to regard the Gospels as myths. They had not the mythical taste."

The historical record is such that it doesn't force anyone's hand; you can't prove Christianity in a mathematical sense. But there *is* sufficient evidence to provide a reasonable foundation for Christian faith.

>>9815196
There are historians to talk about the Bible. There is historical evidence for the Bible. The Quran is the only contemporary document to talk about Muhammad, most of it from the first person.

>>9815181
At no point does any of that the draw us to say that therefore a hodgepodge of text written in Hebrew and Greek in Ancient Judea should be taken as divine truth, though. To argue in favour of a God is one thing, but to then claim that his will is known to us is completely without any basis. The jump from Deism to Theism is not possible.

But I can't tell if you were taking the piss or not.

>>9815051
"noli me tangere" is Christ foretelling his ascension. He's saying for his disciples to not rely on his physical presence after the brief period he remains on earth following his resurrection.

Paul using Christ as a vehicle for his stoic (?) philosophy seems unlikely due to majority of his epistles revolving around and the churches in Corinth, Galatia, Phillippi, etc and liturgy, specific traditions, etc.

>>9815103
Gnosticism is mostly a modern construct with no historical basis.

File: grant.jpg (430KB, 732x1025px) Image search: [Google]

430KB, 732x1025px

>>9815213
>"noli me tangere" is Christ foretelling his ascension

This is a later theologian's reading, one that attempts to justify the literalness of the resurrection. Because:

>He's saying for his disciples to not rely on his physical presence after the brief period he remains on earth following his resurrection.

This is precisely the same way I see it. Jesus' sermon, parables, and acts illustrated the way. Then he conveniently vanishes. The apostles wrote this scene specifically to take authority from the magical symbol of Jesus and invest it in the noble, earthly work of the early Church.

File: 1500685155432.jpg (385KB, 800x938px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 800x938px

DEUS VULT

>>9815203
>There is historical evidence for the Bible

The first mentions of Christianity by an historian was made by Josephus nearly 100 years after the supposed events. I don't really count that as evidence.

>>9815204
Whatever you say bucko. You act out the Christian value system already, however your rational mind (aka Satan) twists it. I can see that I speak with a mere persona, a feigned individuality, a compromise between the individual an society: you're acting out a cliched role. Something which you do not see, protects you from something you do not understand; the thing you can not see is culture, the thing you do not understand - chaos.

>>9814984
Just because you met some hippies who refused to read doesnt make tryptamines not a chemical catalyst for exploring consciousness.

>>9815269
Whoops, looks like you were just taking the piss. *facepalm* xD !!1!!

File: 1475996731491.jpg (79KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 720x960px

>>9815245

>>9815284
I'm doing both, genius. I don't expect you to understand.

1 The Bible isn't a science book. 2 The Bible isn't necessary.

File: 1471948186808.jpg (617KB, 1280x881px) Image search: [Google]

617KB, 1280x881px

>>9815243
This is not a very thought out reading of the Gospels. Even if the Gospels could be read in such a way that the story of the Passion was purely allegorical, it's clear the fathers of the Church (who were under the influence of the Apostles) believed that the resurrection was literal. It does not seem likely the faith was so severely manipulated over even a few generations of tradition.

Read St. Ignatius' epistle to the Smyrnaeans for example. St. Ignatius studied under St. John, and it would seem that by your reading of the Gospels, John's would be the most likely to fit this view.

"Now, He suffered all these things for our sakes, that we might be saved. And He suffered truly, even as also He truly raised up Himself, not, as certain unbelievers maintain, that He only seemed to suffer, as they themselves only seem to be [Christians]."
"For I know that after His resurrection also He was still possessed of flesh, and I believe that He is so now. When, for instance, He came to those who were with Peter, He said to them, "Lay hold, handle Me, and see that I am not an incorporeal spirit." And immediately they touched Him, and believed, being convinced both by His flesh and spirit"
I encourage you to read the rest of the Epistle because it continues to emphasize the literal nature of the accounts: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0109.htm

>>9815243
I should add that I do believe an unknowable something is the generator of all things, and -- as beings -- we are all one in it. Call it a monad, call it a demiurge, whatever. I am satisfied the Greeks proved we did not come from nothing. I also know the apostles did not create the new Church in a vacuum and Plato and the Tanakh were the holy books in their day. Indeed, Augustine was heavily influenced by Plotinus, and his interpretation of God as 'someone' steered the Church in a bad direction.

I am a theist. But I can't believe in the Church's literalist dogma because it leads to this kind of thinking:

>your rational mind (aka Satan)
>Hell, sometimes I feel like I could run this shit better than god.
>so silly to believe that a god that would communicate his message the same way a normal human would
and
>magic trick statues weeping blood
>going into a building for the light of truth and walking out with literal fire

It's moronic, and superstition is not what the apostles intended.

>>9814612
Listen to all Bishop Barron podcasts and read Aquinas, no jokes. For the natural disasters, read Job. Keep studying theology and philosophy, open yourself and with time you will see Christ as the nexus for all meaning

>>9814732
Genesis was never taken literally except by literal plebs. Read Augustine and church fathers of the second centuries. Don't project texan fundamentalism into the past of all religious intellectual. Start with the greeks too, and the jews.

File: socrates.jpg (3MB, 1910x1482px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1910x1482px

>>9815345
I have read it, and confirm it here: >>9815186. The apostles tell the story of a literal resurrection. That's clear. But I don't believe they were being honest in telling their ghost story. Practical for the sake of spreading their beliefs to the ignorant, sure, and even philosophically true. But not literally true.

>fathers of the Church
They were also under the influence of the Greek idea of a body-soul-god union in man, and man owing part of himself to an unknowable form (of the g[o]od). aka the Father, who is perfect in heaven. That which is true and beautiful and just (Phaedrus, Symposium).

>>9814612
Both sides, atheists and believers, are causing the "degeneration" of Western Civilization (I'm not so convinced that this is a phenomenon as much as /pol/ is). Stop romanticizing the past you brainlet.

>>9815351
>your rational mind (aka Satan)
>It's moronic, and superstition is not what the apostles intended.

You are moronic instead, ever read Paradise Lost? Satan is the highest angel in the court, yet he is rebellious .

>>9815384
Both those groups adhere to the main ideology of their own time anyway, you can't escape that.

>>9815385
Yes I have read Paradist Lost. It was too long. Milton's a genius though. I'm not saying you can't have your superstition. It's just not for me, and probably bad for the species.

>>9815397
>It was too long. Milton's a genius though.
pseud detected, not like anyone believes a word you say but now you are completely discredited

go away

File: 1479876659352.jpg (124KB, 700x943px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 700x943px

>>9815402
Heh, okay. I actually have read it though. *hides your post*

File: 1500688631826m.jpg (72KB, 619x1024px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 619x1024px

>>9815405
>swastika
/pol/ is always right.

The ruling class of a dying empire invented the Christ and then reinvented themselves and used the Christ and their new image to exert control over the populace. And it worked. It continues to work.

Also:

>the god of Abraham is the only feasible god, all other gods are false and ridiculous. If the god of Abraham does not exist, then there is nothing more than this life.

That is the wrong way to think.

>>9814612
I stopped believing in Christianity when I started reading Sumarian poems

>>9815417
oh man we need a pope like that again not some commie cuck

File: 1486380861105.png (1MB, 640x3993px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x3993px

>>9815381
Seems too theoretical to be martyred en masse for.

>>9815463
>The ruling class of a dying empire invented the Christ and then reinvented themselves and used the Christ and their new image to exert control over the populace. And it worked. It continues to work.

Quite right. Let's not forget the full name of the Roman Catholic Church.

And 'in hoc signo vinces,' omen of Emperor Constantine, who reigned and conquered under the sign of the cross for decades before the Council of Nicea in 325.

>>9815495
What should they have done? Recanted? Destroyed their life work? tbhwyf I would have done the same. I can't know for certain what they saw, and neither can you.

File: bfi.jpg (31KB, 600x234px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 600x234px

>>9814612

File: 1500860093615.jpg (160KB, 936x1000px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 936x1000px

>>9814900
Maps of Meming

>>9815523
You say that they Apostles themselves wrote as if it was literal (except some verses where they don't?) and the Fathers studying under them wrote that it *was* literal, yet all of them conspired together and were secretly gnostics.

That's a pretty big claim and you don't have a lot to back that up, tbqh.
Besides, if they wanted to further a certain philosophy, why not just be direct?

I'm starting to think you're not entirely sincere, or at least your lying to save your ass with certain stuff, i.e. >>9815397

File: Also sprach Zaramaustra.jpg (126KB, 480x608px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 480x608px

>I understand that god doesn't want to intervene because free will and all that but that only accounts for humans being scummy to each other. Why do natural disasters constantly fuck with people's livelihood ( Mostly the more religious countries and regions I might add) and how is that necessary?
What makes you think this world is not your responsibility as well? Why should God intervene with all of nature but not humans in particular; isn't it you that's being anthropocentric now?

>Hell, sometimes I feel like I could run this shit better than god.
You can't even figure out this shit for yourself, and you think you can run the goddamn universe? "Think again, sunshine."

>That would be the fucking checkmate atheists right?
No, it wouldn't be. Religion's not there to make your life easier, it's there so that you can be more than your circumstances. Which is why those poor suffering people find solace in it!

>Never been much of a believer but I do appreciate the way Christianity spread its values throughout Europe and with the way western civilization is collapsing at the moment.
See?!

>It's just seems so silly
How's it sillier than a bunch of tiny and giant balls spinning in the middle of nowhere for no reason? Why does it matter so much that it's silly to you? Who's going to laugh at you? Yourself?

File: holycrackers.png (105KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 256x256px

>>9815656
>You say that they Apostles themselves wrote as if it was literal (except some verses where they don't?)
Yes. They portrayed the resurrection as a historical event, and invented the acts of a risen Christ afterwards (and potentially before) for the purpose of building an oral philosophical novel. A narrative of moral instruction that would inevitably work toward the ideals they believed in.

>and the Fathers studying under them wrote that it *was* literal
What choice did later church fathers have? The apostles were saying a literal resurrection was the truth.

>all of them conspired together and were secretly gnostics.
I have not mentioned gnosticism once, aside from answering someone's question. I have said some of their learning was Platonic in nature, and the New Testament as written by them buries Greek ideas common at the time under a Platonic narrative. Does no one recognize the resemblance of Socrates and Jesus? Really? Both wanderers who instructed the people and were martyred for corrupting the youth and being inconvenient pests to the wealthy. Both good men who did not deserve their fate. Both examples of how to live.

>or at least your lying to save your ass with certain stuff ie

Not sure what Paradise Lost has to do with this aside from the Satan/deviating from doctrinal belief gets you hell reference. I read a B&N copy like ten years ago, once. Believe me or not, it makes no difference.

File: PEPECHRIST.jpg (74KB, 512x768px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 512x768px

Which is more likely:

a. A cabal of intellectual Jews created a messiah returning from the dead in order to meme their philosophy of love into propagation, and were subsequently killed by other Jews for their heresy. The story had adherents by this time, however, and these new "Christians" continued practicing in secret for a century or so until Rome decides to make them legal. Then Rome adopts it as the official religion. By now the story is legend, and new generations of intellectuals are writing about the metaphysics of the New Testament and ripping off the Greeks. Was Christ a man or a god? Was he part man part god? If so how could he also be the son of god. And so on and so on until silly controversies like transubstantiation and intercession of saints. The bulk of Catholic theology is smart, dedicated people asking the wrong questions because they could not violate the catechism. Eventually politics catches on and uses the new religion as a tool of state, divine right and them. And here we are today.

or

b. A man actually literally rose up, rolled a rock aside, visited his friends and disappeared into the sky after dropping a few important metaphysical clues about himself.

>>9815941
b. thank

File: jesus.jpg (182KB, 590x421px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 590x421px

>>9815980
You have chosen... wisely, anon.

File: Our-Lady-of-Guadalupe.jpg (356KB, 1151x1525px) Image search: [Google]

356KB, 1151x1525px

>>9815795
The difference is that nobody ever claimed Socrates rose from the dead, while that claim is pretty ubiquitous with Jesus.

I take it you don't put much stock in the supernatural elements of Christianity--apparitions, healings, miracles, signs and wonders and so on. I feel this is a mistake on your part. The spooky stuff is the difference between a genuine religion and an ethical system.

>>9815941
False dichotomy.

why are atheists incapable of seeing much less understanding parable or metaphor? was it autism?

>>9815795
The apostles didn't write shit nigga. The earliest writings were c. 60-70 for Mark (who wasn't an apostle) and this is generally consider to be a school of disciples writing down a sort of collected works.

Also acts of the risen christ? Have you noticed how ridiculously sparse that is? Like "appeared on a road twice to one of us, and then in a closed door once (in john, the most made up of the gospels)" is not a strong set of acts.

File: bugsrich.jpg (41KB, 468x355px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 468x355px

>>9816014
>The difference is that nobody ever claimed Socrates rose from the dead, while that claim is pretty ubiquitous with Jesus.
Precisely. But what is the purpose of this claim? And can it be proven? No. You may say well

>I take it you don't put much stock in the supernatural elements of Christianity
I don't. Because I admit that God is the cause of all things I can't deny that any supernatural event is impossible, only improbable. I have not witnessed a miracle, or trust any source that has. Miracles might happen, but mental illness and self-delusion definitely happens. Regularly.

>I feel this is a mistake on your part. The spooky stuff is the difference between a genuine religion and an ethical system.
I feel the spooky stuff is unnecessary and religion can be harmful. What is religion but an unreasonable philosophy? But mortal experience is just the infinite exploring itself so whatever. If people want to blow each other up over this, I can't stop them but I can sure as hell condemn the institutional fabulations and intellectual cowardice that motivated them.

t. Grew up Mexi-Catholic. Your pic triggers me.

>>9815795
>>9816014
This.
The similarity of Christ with Hellenistic philosophers was God's way of preparing the gentiles for Christ.
The actual likelihood that the "historical" Jesus of Nazareth was influenced by them seems much more slim.

>>9816038
Not if you believe the dead cannot be ambulatory. One may be true, the other can't be true. And if the eternal fallback of 'you must have faith' is drawn, I will tell you that "faith in Christ" as expressed in the NT means faith in his message, not faith that he did X, Y, or Z in real life.

File: battle-of-the-milvian-bridge-large.jpg (69KB, 640x431px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 640x431px

>>9816076
>t. Grew up Mexi-Catholic. Your pic triggers me.

Well, my thinking on religion is deeply colored by the miraculous and the supernatural. I think it's all quite real, and, moreover, is an inescapable part of human history (and the present also) that we ignore at our peril. It never went away, we just tried to pretend it never existed and doesn't exist.

I grew up in a Sicilian family, so I was also raised Catholic. But I've actually gotten more religious as I've grown older. I have come to realize that the Church is something spellbinding and wondrous, unlike anything else in the world. I have come to realize that, not only is Christianity true, but that there is a divinity that runs through the Catholic Church. Because of course there is, Christ himself founded it. The Church is God's instrument on Earth. Even the most corrupt and sinful priests, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and popes can and have done God's will in the world, because they cannot help but do it.

So, that's my other major dispute with you: you seem to see God as a distant figure. I see him as an active participant in history, usually in the form of those he sends out on his behalf: the prophets, the servants, the saints. I think someone could plot out a pattern of divine intervention in history, particularly after the Resurrection, if they were so inclined.

>>9816121
The New Testament itself tells you not to think of Christ literally. See >>9814921 pic. Christ literally became a means of reconciling man with God. This makes no sense at all if you think of Christ as a personage. It makes complete sense if you think of Christ as a symbol for everything he taught, ESPECIALLY when you consider the God they are talking about is not the God of Israel but the Platonic Form of the Good. An unknowable entity that represents transcendental goodness, justice, and beauty. What unknowable being-beyond-being could care about humanity but that one? This is the heresy that killed the apostles and caused the Christian persecution.

My ONLY beef with Catholicism (besides the rape) is the intellectual cowardice. People like >>9814895 who refuse to use the brains they have received. They contribute monetarily to this institution, and silence its critics. Over the many centuries the Church has been misused by the state, and not always unwillingly. No doubt it has caused much good, but compassion does not come from mysticism. And mysticism alone cannot sustain us. Even Mother Teresa doubted her faith.

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, just answering questions about my own belief. And I feel justified regardless, because my concept of ultimate goodness is the same as a devout Catholic's.

File: pepeeee.jpg (12KB, 250x242px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 250x242px

>>9816174
And if the Church HAS betrayed the good, as to be expected, we should not pretend that it is presently living up to the ideal it represents.

>>9816174
>And mysticism alone cannot sustain us

Mysticism is a species of faith, which IS sufficient. Faith, hope, and love are what the Church brings to the world, and these are enough. Pope Benedict, in his "Jesus of Nazareth" books, says that what Christ brought to the world more than anything else was the ability of all people to know God more fully, and to commune with God on the most intimate of levels. It's not a matter of compassion or building a better society. The Church exists to bring God to the nations, to proclaim the good news of Christ risen, sins redeemed, and paradise regained. The Church spreads the good news of the risen Christ because that is what Christ told it to do.

>>9815941
Is the resurrection really all that crazy though? I mean, the dude just choked to death and got stabbed on the side. Maybe he went catatonic or something.

File: 1475268042600.png (504KB, 454x600px) Image search: [Google]

504KB, 454x600px

>>9815100
Western Civilization is the result of Greco-Roman religion, not Christianity.

>>9814612
>Never been much of a believer
Stopped reading right there. Found your problem.

>God says to Moses or whoever " check out the Xth millionth digit of the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter"
>People aren't really sure what to make of the prophecy but eventually mathematics as a field takes a key role and helps society develop faster in the process
>Years later modern mathematicians find the beginning of a string of binary that lists the Lords Prayer or the 10 commandments or some shit

Why not do this

File: REEE.jpg (69KB, 480x574px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 480x574px

>>9816260
>faith, which IS sufficient

Not when ordinaries of the church are proving your faith in their interpretation of scripture is misplaced. To say nothing of the institutional moral failures that drive people away from the word, and which betrays the premise of the church itself.

I'm all about Imitatio Dei, though. And one does not need the church for that.

>>9814612
It's cool threads like these that are why I still come to /lit/.

File: 2a6.png (417KB, 680x590px) Image search: [Google]

417KB, 680x590px

>>9814612
All religions are connected. "Thou shalt have no other gods before me", the other gods are not perfect like God, they are sinful such as the Greeks gods and goddesses. Angels even, some can be evil.
Not to be misunderstood.
>lol why is there weather and shit
>lol why does the bible burn like any other book
>lol why is there an argument against god, doesn't he want to be followed, he should just make it clear
Read the Bible, the answers are right infront of you.

Well, the old testament is a book of mythology while the new testament contains a divine message.
You see, God is creating a more glorious creation through self-reliance. Self-reliance increases the virtue in the human soul. If humans do the work of the gospel, God has created a more glorious human and more glorious creation.

File: 1491505354438m.jpg (71KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1024x576px

bump for /daylit/. good thread fellas

Haven't participated in this thread before this post, but to Mexi-Catholic heretic anon:

Your central argument - which I'm flabbergasted that no one here has attacked yet - seems to be that 1) because there are some superficial similarities between the story of Jesus in the gospels and the life of Plato, and 2) because the gospels appear farther along in linear time than Plato, that 3) therefore the gospels are actually just repackaged Platonism, and no other conclusion is possible.

...you do know that is a droolingly retarded argument, right? Especially for someone who claims to believe in a deity?

Empirical evidence is nonexistent and science is thereby invalid.
God communicates through revelation and the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is the key to the Bible.

Your disgusting Newtonian mind feels a need to hyperrationalize. You hate God and His irrationality.

>>9814726
Existentialism is for children, as is science.
Scrutiny is nonexistent. The average critic is damn soft and afraid of really digging in with a knife or bludgeoning with a hammer.

>>9814811
Proof is nonexistent and the desire for it is a cancer that began to grow with humanist horsepiss.
>>9814947
All reasoning is faulty.

>>9815095
NT came first, much earlier, and Christ is predicted in the OT.

Neither predict Muhammad.

>>9816060
ORAL TRADITIONS DO EXIST YOU STUPID FUCKING MILLENNIAL

SO MUCH OF WHAT WE HAVE FROM ARISTOTLE IS BASED OFF OF LECTURE NOTES, I.E., WRITTEN RECORDINGS OF AN 'ORAL TRADITION'

THE STUDENTS OF THE APOSTLES DID THE SAME THING.

>>9816403
Morality is a human construct, God functions on a much higher order.

>135 replies
>nobody has given OP a straight answer
>only pseudo-gnosticist jabbering

God is le unknowable.

Just le believe.

>>9817252
>why is no one writing under 140 characters concise witty remarks that reaffirm my liberal-technocratic view of the world wahhh

File: Divine-Mercy-3-189x300.jpg (17KB, 189x300px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 189x300px

>>9817252
>nobody has given OP a straight answer

There have been a few good replies, surrounded by a lot of arguing and junk, alas.

See:
>>9815049
>>9815049
>>9815049
>>9815049

And
>>9815198
>>9815198
>>9815198
>>9815198

Those posts were an honest, and frankly prayerful attempt to reply to the several issues raised by OP.

>>9815198
>Paul using an old word is enough proof of someone resurrecting
Well done, i'm know a believer as smart as you. Christianism is truly the real thing

>>9817222
Yes, but the difference there is Aristotle doesn't need to be a historical record; his lecture notes just have to be logical. There's a much higher bar when you're talking about deifying a guy.

>>9814612
Christians are like psychopaths, they are unable to reason. You can't argue with them, they believe and then find arguments to their shortcuts.

There are thousands of books that explain how and why we lie to ourselves, yet you come here to ask a believer why.

File: 1500485054208.jpg (40KB, 400x450px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 400x450px

>>9817184
>In the course of its history in late antiquity, Neoplatonism proved to be adaptable, fluid and dynamic, much more so than the system of the Stoics, the dominant philosophy during Hellenistic times. It appealed to the mundane literati as much as to the religious zealot, to the die-hard pagan as much as to the up-start Christian who needed a philosophical background to parse the theological fine points which would eventually distinguish the orthodox from the heretic.

t. primary sources and https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/neoplatonism/

Educate yourself before you call people retarded. And that was a poor strawman of my position.

>>9817683
Definitely a shill post, fuck off.

>>9817223
So the church can cover up the abuse of children because God wills it?

>>9818585
Well one would argue that God DOESN'T will it, because it got found out. If God wanted it covered up it would have stayed covered up forever, now wouldn't it?

This is why I'll never understand the Protestants who think the Church somehow controls the world. We can't even keep some kiddy rape covered up for a few decades, how could we control governments?

>>9817192
Are you trying to take some sort of general immaterialist position, or are you simply stating there's no empirical evidence for Christianity?

I'd argue that miracles, healings, apparitions, and signs could be counted as evidence, especially when they conform to things from Scripture.

>>9814677
>not because we've lost track of the correct way
>with too inflated a sense of our domain and what kind of lifestyle we're entitled to.

How are these contradictory?

>>9817276
>atheists think this is a criticism
>>9817655
Why does that fucking matter? Holy fucking shit why are atheists so fucking autistic?

Do you think 'logic' isn't fucking faith-based?

>>9817683
MUH RAISINS IF U RNT LIEK ME THEN UR LYING BECUZ LE BOOKS SED SO

>>9818585
Are you fucking autistic, kid? Holy fucking shit, how about you learn to read? Fucking *nglos and their ridiculous phobia of C*tholics.

>>9818610
I'm an empiricist, you dope. Empirical evidence is a meme made up by systematizers.
Miracles are only evidence to protestants looking for ways to make Christianity H1P 4 K1Dzzz!!!!

>>9817223
>Morality is a human construct
Umm not if you're a Christian it isn't
>>9818768
>Logic is like so frickin mysterious bro, therefore my specific and arbitrary belief in the Abrahamic God is justified
Nice one d u d e

>>9818786
That's patently untrue, not the least of which because Catholicism has more modern miracles than Protestantism. At least more big ones.

>>9815161
someone else is larping as me, but i wasnt about to type out some theological treatise on mobile right before i went to sleep

also, having done so a thousand times before, i have a sense of when the treatise is worthwhile and when its worthless; OP did not betray a readiness to march in synergetic lockstep with God. as a believer in prevenient grace, as well as in the Holy Spirit, I speak in such terms as he bade me.

For you and OP, I have but two words:
reflect, repent

>>9819149
I'm 9815161. Just to let you know, that entire reply you just made was complete arrogant white noise and wasn't worth typing out. Basically just amounts to "I'm right now go away and think about the largely vacuous theistic points I couldn't even be bothered to make until you realise I'm right."

>>9814900
>a metaphorical and psychological interpretation of religion will help you beleive in God

>>9814612
>but I do appreciate the way Christianity spread its values throughout Europe and with the way western civilization is collapsing at the moment.

>the spread of a foreign middle eastern cult is saving western civilization

File: 1488348643185.jpg (50KB, 773x645px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 773x645px

religion is more about achieving social stability and control than it's about spirituality at it's core.
since the french revolution, the elite has found a way to control society through human passions. they embraced sexual liberation, pornography, gluttony, etc... to replace the old 'evil' christian values. now we are too distracted jerking off to tranny porn to care about what's really happening around us instead of having children and going to church like 60 years ago. not that one form of social control is really better than the other, i think that homosexuals being able to have normal relationships now is great, while stuff like the 'slut walk' is appalling to me. i guess both go hand in hand though.

i'm not saying one could't be inspired by christian values, but everyone sins, everyone feels drawn to their passions. it's pretty much impossible to be religious if everyone around you is not. i admire people that genuinely believe in god nowadays, even if it's naive. that must be so comforting.

File: a034f223955e6ec5d1cd1216e8138e68.jpg (161KB, 688x960px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 688x960px

Anyway, the reality of the Christian God is something no one wants to talk about any more, but it hasn't gone away. Indeed, in our age of increased documentation, Christ might be said to be more observable than ever. It is easier to see him working in the world than ever before. I think most atheists are willfully ignorant, in all honesty. They choose not to see the light, even though it can be blinding. They hide from the signs of God, because to confront God would mean their own behavior, good or ill, would be called to account, and that's very intimidating. At least when you don't have a priest to whom you may confess your sins.

Just believe brother,wine and fresh churchboys will be rewarded!

In what way is your religion different from the thousands of others?

>>9817192
See>>9814726

>>9817206
That's nice reasoning.

>>9819366

>religion is more about achieving social stability and control than it's about spirituality

Religion as an organized institution yes. Religion as a concept nah.

>>9819450
>what is confirmation bias

>>9819177
>so new he can't quote his own post
my man....

>>9814612
>Like, Imagine if all Bibles were indestructible. That would be the fucking checkmate atheists right? How would anybody be able to argue against god's existence if the Bible was made out of something entirely unique that broke the laws that bind the rest of the material world. It would set itself a part from other religious texts and be impossible to argue against.

The typical explanation for this is that if god made his presence undeniably known then there would be no point to free will. God wants you to recognize that his teachings show the proper way of being and he wants you to come to that conclusion on your own. If there was proof of his existence then everyone would follow his teachings because they know they come from a divine authority not because they recognize them as the proper way of being.

>>9818864
>Umm not if you're a Christian it isn't
False, God is beyond morality.
Logic is nonexistent. All beliefs are 'arbitrary' you fucking dope, including every last one of yours in memes like humanism, progress, and 'science'.
>>9819114
>what is Pentecostalism

File: go-ahead-make-my-day.jpg (101KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1280x720px

>>9814612
>Empirical evidence basically goes against every claim made by Abrahamic religions

dude it's a religious truth not an empirical truth lmao

>>9819229
>cult
WE WUZ VIKANGS N SHIEEEEEEEEEEEEET

>>9819366
Fuck off, psychobabblist.
Religion is not comforting.

>>9819366
>that must be so comforting

Try believing in eternal damnation sometime, buddy

>>9819499
Your post is irrelevant to mine, sorry!
No, you are not 'le mature' for falling for the existentialism meme. No, 'good ideas' don't stand up to scrutiny you fucking humanist.
>hurr durr if ppl jus THINK REEL HARD then they cn figre al!

File: waaah.jpg (121KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1280x720px

>>9820628
>truth is the most important thing
>DUDE THAT'S A DIFFERENT SORT OF TRUTH

>>9820670
Truth is nonexistent and empiricism is inherently a rejection of truth

>>9820672
tell that to kermit.

>>9820637
>>9820647
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oldj11NEsc0

>>9820691
>evolution
Nonexistent. Psychobabble as a well-produced video is still psychobabble.

File: 1495088437226.jpg (44KB, 329x399px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 329x399px

>>9820763
aren't you a contrarian

>>9820772
IF YOU DISAGREE WITH MY INSTITUTIONALIZED IDEOLOGY THAN UR JUS THIS THIGN I DONT LIKE

File: 1477323751262.jpg (196KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 900x900px

>>9820786

File: ohhhhhhhnibba.jpg (11KB, 328x277px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 328x277px

>>9817184
>confusing Plato for Socrates

>>9815050

he's expressing what everyone thinks of that post in image-form

>>9814612
Cultural protestant, I...

>>9819366
>i think that homosexuals being able to have normal relationships now is great
It's still deranged and a sin though but psshhh... Read Freud.

File: FB_IMG_1501278368652.jpg (84KB, 564x752px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 564x752px

>>9814612
Not a Christian nor a follower of any other organized religion. But here some thoughts I have.
I think there is zero importance to the historical authenticity of a holy scripture. It should be looked at metaphorically. The Bible doesn't correlate with our modern knowledge of the universe, and theists trying to force the one on the other are deluded. Yet a work of fiction can't affect you because it isn't based on real events? Doesn't seem right.
Secondly, whether god exists objectively is of no importance, there is no way of finding that out. If you choose to believe in him, he is there for you. Personally I think that there is some transcendental source or element out there that when people come to experience they interpret it in many ways and express it with different names and forms. So arguing about what belief is the right one is absolute stupidity.
Empiricism and the scientific method has their value and significance, but they shouldn't limit man's view on reality because thus they lead us to materialism and nihilism, and these are unhealthy and destructive.

>>9814612
I don't need to explain shit to you - you're clearly too stupid to come up with a reasonable conclusion regarding these matters.

>>9815001
Cringe is a control mechanism based around your pride.

>>9814612
>Empirical evidence goes against every claim
Your body is the temple of God.

>>9814656
Lmao I actually laughed at this

Start with the Greeks
Read Hegel
Read Freud
Read Jung
Read Lacan
Have sex
Take a shower

You'll understand God.

>>9814811
Catholics ruined Christianity and then protestants nailed the coffin shut

>>9814984
Look into what psychedelics do to your brain. On thing they do Is stop your brain from filtering out info like normal

>>9821070
>I think there is zero importance to the historical authenticity of a holy scripture
Muh noble lie platonists should fuck off

File: 14792347801841.png (343KB, 356x403px) Image search: [Google]

343KB, 356x403px

>>9821035
i agree. most homosexuals are damaged people. i'm convinced that being gay occurs because of abuse and/or homosexual experiences during childhood or as an early teen. it's abnormal but those people are fucked enough, i don't see a problem with not killing them and letting them have a civil marriage as long as they know their place in society.
i'm against them raising kids or promoting faggotry so much like they are doing now though. sodomy is disgusting but you can't really keep it from happening. best you can do is try to isolate the faggots.
it's hard to discuss this with people that only care about their emotions and passions like most do nowadays. they are convinced that you are born a homosexual, so whenever you suggest that it's an abnormal behaviour that might be the manifestation of deeper issues they go nuts.

all in all, i still believe in empathy so i believe in (limited) gay rights.

going to read what freud had to say about it, thanks.

>>9820647
i guess you are right... i'm conflicted though because believing in something else, something pure and bigger than yourself feels comforting but at the same time you have all these retarded believes and restrictions.

> oh i masturbated, i'm going to fucking burn for eternity unless i make a generous donation to my local church and tell some old weirdo about it

>>9821241
>philosophy is boring, gimme muh angels and demons!

sage

sageing anti-intellectual goobers everyday

>>9815554

What's wrong with the book?

>>9821300
>muh vapid contemplation!

>>9821070
Fuck off, ideologue.
Science belongs in the sewers, swimming with the gators.

File: heaven.jpg (39KB, 610x343px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 610x343px

>>9821358
in you go

>>9820627

>All beliefs are 'arbitrary'
So true, the belief that my house is actually floating in mid-air is as arbitrary and therefore as valid as the belief in tectonic plates. Christianity is correct then! As is Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, and Judaism since all beliefs are arbitrary and can somehow remain acceptable because of this, thanks OP!!

>>9821470
Redditors really are dead in the head.

>>9821474
>le reddit boogeyman
You've spent too much time here, bud. Maybe try going outside for a bit?

>>9821219
How was you 8th grade graduation?

File: angel-stop-hitting-yourself.jpg (92KB, 560x235px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 560x235px

>>9817697

Silly me, I forgot that when Stanford (or Harvard, or Princeton) asserts a theory, they don't need to make sense.

I'll repeat: just because Christianity appeared after Platonism and harmonized well with its ideas doesn't mean that it's some sort of mysitically-branded knock-off. It also doesn't imply that the mystical and miraculous elements of Christianity were invented. It just doesn't logically follow. Using that argument, you can basically discredit any religion or philosophy whatsoever, since there's nothing new under the sun. You don't seem to consider that an idea can be a) true b) incomplete, and c) arrived at independently by different people in different points of time, all at once. In other words, it's possible that Platonism was merely an anticipation of the greater Truth revealed by Christianity. Mind you, I'm not asserting that blindly, as you do with your theory. I'm saying you don't even consider it as a possibilty, when it has just as much evidence in favor of it as your theory.

>that was a poor strawman of my position

Not really. You basically just repeated yourself over and over. Your position is quite clear, and logically incoherent.

>>9815537
Gödel's """proof""" is shit and also basically a rehash of Anselm's """proof""".

File: youknowwho.jpg (187KB, 2560x1080px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 2560x1080px

>>9821539
Are you able to walk me through the reasoning for your assertion that Platonism was an anticipation of a "greater Truth" in Christianity? Because if that is your case then Christianity was just the anticipation of a "greater Truth" in Science as revealed in the past 400 years. You know, the praxis that actually does perform miracles.

>inb4 The personified God you mistaken imagine made both Science and Platonism - so Christian dogma, not God, is the source of everything.

Don't overextend yourself m8. You haven't reasoned a single thing yet. I've given plenty of evidence for my interpretation.

>>9821485
I have a garden, wife, and child. I leave the home more than you do.

>>9821575
Science is wrong though, and does not perform miracles. It rapes the planet and tempts the once faithful away from God.
>reasoning is good because reddit sed it

>>9821604
That makes your 4chan usage all the more pathetic

File: absolutelydisgusted.jpg (90KB, 1280x540px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 1280x540px

>>9821608
The state of Christianity today, ladies and gents.

>>9821575
>I've given plenty of evidence for my interpretation

Here are all the posts that touch on your position which I can discern as yours (apologies if one or two aren't you, it's difficult to tell one psued from another on /lit/):

>>9814677
>>9814832
>>9814921
>>9815051
>>9815116
>>9815186
>>9815243
>>9815351
>>9815381
>>9815795
>>9816076
>>9816174

I see a lot of conjecture, speculation, assertion, and bloviation, but no evidence.

And if you read my post, I didn't "assert" that Platonism was an anticipation of a greater Truth in Christianity. In fact, let's quote me:

>Mind you, I'm not asserting that blindly, as you do with your theory. I'm saying you don't even consider it as a possibilty, when it has just as much evidence in favor of it as your theory.

That evidence - that if I was inclined to assert anything, I would use - is the same that you claim that you used. Namely, the New Testament.

File: deliciousyous.png (2KB, 135x221px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 135x221px

>>9821673
Good detective work. I was also >>9814887, >>9815941, >>9816212, and >>9815496.

>I see a lot of conjecture, speculation, assertion, and bloviation, but no evidence.

I hope you actually read the thread. In it, I cited primary sources: Scripture (John, 1Cor, Matthew, etc), specific Platonic dialogues (Phadrus, Symposium), specific Platonic ideas (the form of the good as first principle and analogous to the virtues embodied by Christ), the neoplatonist Plotinus (Enneads), and Augustine. Whether you considered those sources and found my interpretation incontrovertible or not is on you. I can't make you understand.

You, and others, have simply hand-waved it all away. That's okay, I'm not out to convince you. I'm only defending a very well established fact (that Christianity inherited its philosophy of love from heretical Hellenic Jews), and providing my personal reasoning for it.

File: jeezus.jpg (365KB, 1000x1409px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 1000x1409px

But please continue believing in superstition and myth, regardless of the philosophy shining through Scripture. This is God's will after all, and everything will be for the good in the end.

>>9821714
>I hope you actually read the thread

This is /lit/. Nobody reads, period.

>I cited primary sources

Citations (well, in your case, not so much "citations" as questionable reinterpretations of sources) don't equal cogent arguments. If your citations don't prove what you're trying to make them prove, they don't actually count as evidence. Thus, I saw no evidence.

>You, and others, have simply hand-waved it all away

It's easy to wave away a puff of hot air.

>I'm only defending a very well established fact (that Christianity inherited its philosophy of love from heretical Hellenic Jews)

That Christianity inherited all or most of everything it had to pass on as inheritance from heretical Hellenic Jews, I think anyone would grant, given that such a label describes Christ. What you meant to say is, "I'm only propounding the dubious and unoriginal doctrine that Christianity inherited its philosophy of love, and everything else, from heretical Hellenic Jews - *and therefore* the miraculous/organized religious elements of Christianity are fictions." Which doesn't follow, and which can't be inferred from any of the primary sources you name-dropped.

>I'm not out to convince you

The fact that you've set up your soap-box in at least one other current thread, while harping on the same topic, makes that difficult for me to believe, Satan.

Religion is bullshit, free will doesn't exist, God is a lie. Read the bible but read other books too, you'll realize that you can live a fulfilling life without being a Christian.

>>9822590
>If your citations don't prove what you're trying to make them prove, they don't actually count as evidence. Thus, I saw no evidence.

Third-party here. This is not a proper understanding of evidence, and in these sorts of arguments it really is a good idea to be straight on what's evidence and what's not.

In a criminal trial, both the prosecution and the defense address themselves to the exact same evidence -- the blood, the gloves, the footprints, etc. The same evidence for both, they simply interpret it differently.

The Prosecution: The blood on the carpet is from the cut to the killer's finger which he acquired when he was slicing his victim's neck.

The Defense: No, the blood on the carpet was planted there as part of a conspiracy by the police (and that cut on the defendant's finger was perfectly innocent, from a glass that broke in his hand not a knife).

Thus, for example, 1 Corinthians (and the rest of the New Testament) is definitely evidence, but interpreted differently in this thread by the "prosecution" (>>9815051) and the "defense" (>>9815065).

The correct interpretation of 1 Corinthians, btw, is set out here >>9815198.

>>9822710
I might add, the same applies in arguments between theists and atheists.

Atheists often say there's no evidence for God.

But consider Dawkins' remarks in the Preface to The Blind Watchmaker:

>"The complexity of living organisms is matched by the elegant efficiency of their apparent design. If anyone doesn't agree that this amount of complex design cries out for an explanation, I give up."

Theologians have been arguing for centuries that design in nature implies the existence of a Creator. William Paley's famous watchmaker argument is but one example of this.

Dawkins' book addresses itself to Paley's argument, "the best-known exposition of the 'Argument from Design,' always the most influential of the arguments for the existence of a God" (p. 4).

Note that Dawkins doesn't claim that Paley has no evidence -- rather, Dawkins simply interprets the same body of evidence that Paley addressed himself to differently.

Paley's design becomes Dawkins' *apparent* design. Where Paley says the evidence of design in nature demonstrates a Creator, Dawkins says no, the evidence demonstrates the truth of evolution. But Dawkins does not say that Paley has no evidence.

>>9817201
tonight at 11, anonymous poster denounces the ideas of existentialism and modern science as mere child's play
at 12 he masturbates and goes to bed

>>9822710
>>9822913

Thank you for the effortposts. You are, of course, correct about evidence, I'm just grumpily shitposting. It annoys the shit out of me when people go full Dan Brown, and I tend to turn my brain off when responding to that sort of thing. Which really isn't the best habit, but then again I'm posting on 4chan, so it figures.

File: foryou.jpg (297KB, 1920x1202px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 1920x1202px

>*and therefore* the miraculous/organized religious elements of Christianity are fictions." Which doesn't follow
Sorry, I was not aware miracles and the opinions of the Church counted as self-evident Truth these days.

>The fact that you've set up your soap-box in at least one other current thread, while harping on the same topic, makes that difficult for me to believe
OP >>9814612 asked for an explanation why the God of Christianity didn't make indestructible Bibles and other proof. I gave him one. The OP of the other thread asked specifically about this topic, e.g. a Socratic reading of the Bible and metaphor in OT. I told him not to read the OT as metaphor but rather creation myth, chronicle, and tribal law, and to be careful about applying metaphors to *everything* in the NT. In other words, be critical.

>, Satan.
Puff of hot air indeed. OP's question has been answered, and I see not point continuing an argument with someone unwilling to use their faculties. Have a pleasant day anon.

>Why don't we all start on the same footing
The effects of sin radiate out onto people who have done nothing to deserve them. God understands that.

I remember that there was this story about a saint, I forget who, but she got a vision from God. She asked God why there was so much inequality, and God responded that despite the inequality, nobody had everything and thus people would need each other.

>>9821625
*tips*
>>9821642
>WAAAAAH CHRISTIANITY IS ONLY GOOD WHEN ITS APPROVING OF THE GAYS ITS BAD WHEN IT DOESNT MIRROR IDEOLOGIES

>>9821721
An atheist made this. Complete misinterpretation of scripture, bent to support the artist's secular humanism.

>>9822675
Atheist delusion. Secular humanism is not satisfying, its a meme. You think 'le fuzzy feeling' you get from donating a dollar to propagandists in Africa (the ones that show 'le starving kids') is a feeling of fulfillment. Tell me, is a heroin addict 'fulfilled'?

>>9822951
I don't masturbate, I made that post at 6pm and went to bed at about 4am.

Don't bend my words, I didn't say 'modern science'. I said 'science', every last disgusting vine of it.

>>9823429
>An atheist made this.
You are correct. Now try to refute this one: >>9821523

>>9821721
>muh liberal hippie Jesus
He was probably gay as well, amirite ladies? :DDD

>>9823440
Stop projecting so hard, honey. You may have been in a dark enough place in your life that you needed baseless faith in nonsense, but other people are actually able to cherish and lead meaningful lives without the hokum. Your arrogance is just embarrassing.

>>9823491
*tips*
Stop your existebabble.
>baseless
STEMsperg spotted!
fyi life is actually meaningless without an outside orientor. Sorry, 'muh fluffy feeling' isn't 'meaning'. Disgusting addict.

>>9823491
Stop calling me honey you big fat bee

>>9823513
>fyi life is actually meaningless
There's that beautiful Christian arrogance I love so much. Do me a favour and stop pretending you have a clue, it really doesn't suit you. Also your fedora jokes are the absolute height of theological argument, please keep them coming.

>>9821241
>>9821362

Huh, wow! Such profound and insightful arguments and opinions! I'm converted now! Praise the Lord!

>>9823513
>adding 'muh' in front of a strawman representation of an argument counts as a compelling rebuttal
Embarrassing

>>9814612
Imagine him giving instructions, do you think it would be accepted? Imagine him showing himself, what differs between him and a dictator?
Him being a supreme being would greatly diminish his standing. If anything this way with choice and 'freedom' he gets far more followers than by any other means.
I do not believe, but if i were him this is the way.

File: MenAtWorkEA2.gif (580KB, 400x218px) Image search: [Google]

580KB, 400x218px

>>9814612
>Like, Imagine if all Bibles were indestructible. That would be the fucking checkmate atheists right?

I'm a Catholic, and I have thought about this.

In particular, when, a few years ago, I would get very deep into the weeds arguing with Bible Christians, delving into detailed, rigorous, exceedingly lengthy arguments about the meaning of certain passages and words in Scripture, it struck me one time, and I long pondered, why God had arranged things the way He did. The interpretation of texts ALWAYS produces arguments between people; it is inevitable. I say this with some experience in law. Even the most straightforward statute can and does produces endless argument. Indeed, many, perhaps most "trials" ultimately turn on the meaning of a few words, or a single word. Entire libraries are filled with court cases and commentary interpreting the 7,500 or so words that make up the Constitution.

Why arrange things so that the existence of a fixed text, the Bible, would inevitably result in an endless *agon* between various parties -- an agon that would perdure for centuries and millennia?

Well, I can't say that I ever came up with a very good answer to this question, although I have certain intuitions as to the propriety of this arrangement - among other things, the dignity of it, in allowing us to become "co-workers of the truth" (3 John 8) - which I've never really unpacked in my own mind much less in a form of words.

But suffice to say that the (somewhat) pious *do* think about these things.

Again I refer you to >>9815198, because it was this argument about the Resurrection which allowed me to take the step from a somewhat vague but irresistible belief in a Creator - albeit a Creator of uncertain motives, perhaps even the insane creator glimpsed in Eraserhead (at least, in my reading of the film, pic related) - to a belief in Christianity.

Though some of these points seem silly (like the bible burning just like other books), I think you've made some good points and I would like them answered as well.

t. wavering Christian

>>9824067
>I would like them answered as well.

I gave it my best shot, anon.

>>9815049
>>9815198
>>9822710
>>9822913
>>9823801

I would add that >>9815367's recommendation of Bishop Barron is sound. I refer to his many youtube videos, e.g.,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zMf_8hkCdc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_4PSgFjtvI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aR6J1pPiRQo

Do not neglect to ask God for the gift of faith. Pray **earnestly** for this gift. Consider checking out the books noted in the link in >>9815049, here: http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/134814184/#134820661

>>9814612

I tend to think of it as God showing his face on earth for a few decades, allowing a small part of humanity to see it, and letting humanity decide for itself if it wishes to be saved. That means that it is entirely in the hands of those who saw Jesus in his short tenure to act as the first witnesses of the new covenant, and its communicators (or annihilators). It is not only free will that God gives us in our moral actions, it is a free will God gave the world by choosing to accept his message, or to contaminate it with human folly and sin throughout the ages. It is up to humanity to make it the teaching of humanity; it is also a valid choice for humanity to damn itself. It is the artifact that God left us -- he created the watch, but as a kind God, he has wound the watch and allowed it to run. It is up to the watch to keep time accurately.

>>9823440
You realize there are non-Christian cultures where people live just fine, right?

>>9814612
>Like, Imagine if all Bibles were indestructible. That would be the fucking checkmate atheists right? How would anybody be able to argue against god's existence if the Bible was made out of something entirely unique that broke the laws that bind the rest of the material world. It would set itself a part from other religious texts and be impossible to argue against.
You realize books are for reading and engaging with the ideas presented by them, right? The truth is in the ideas, not the physical object that stores them. It isn't some anime video game bullshit m8, this is why you have such a hard time with this. Your thinking has been warped.

>>9824196
No there aren't

>>9824166
Thank you. I really do appreciate it.

>>9823550
>>9823563
>arguments are good because muh fedora sed so
The blind can't be lead no more than cats can be herded.
>>9823573
>compelling
So, you want me to suck your dick? You clearly only care about getting your ego stroked.

>>9824196
They don't live fine, you only think they do because you're a God-hating orientalist.

Ain't no God, boi

File: 1501278677090.jpg (31KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 720x540px

>>9814878
The new testament really boggles my mind. It seems so much more important then the old testament and even has some grounding in being historically accurate, but Jesus claims to be the same god as the one in the old testament and acts as if everything that went down in the OT was legit.

Who the FUCK was Jesus?

>>9825125
imagine being this basic

>>9814612
I know this will be received poorly, but personally I would recommend checking out LDS (Mormon) stuff on the topic. You just sound a lot like me, so I guess it's worth looking stupid on the internet if it helps somebody. They've got some interesting perspectives on things. Good luck whatever you do.

>>9816373
Christianity has shaped Western Civilization far more than what Greco-Roman beliefs did. Christianity is the foundation and the pillar of people's morals. Whether someone is religious or not, it's pretty clear to that if it wasn't for Christianity, the majority would still believe they would get some sort of favour from a glorified demon after killing people.

>>9821207
>understand God
Good luck with that. No one can fully understand God even if you dedicate your whole life into it.

The only Way is through Jesus.

>>9825128
>Who was Jesus?
God the Son.

>>9814612
If it were easy to find the truth, then it wouldn't be a test of character to search for it and then act upon it.