/lit/ - Literature

>>12752888
And I'm asking you how a non-dualist doctrine can be so casually equated to a dualist one, a pantheist conception to a theistic one, a creationist model to an emanationist one, as if they were the same...they are not the same.

Do you think that a writer combining Platonic doctrines from literally three centuries prior to Jesus, along with figures from the mythology of a complete different culture (Yahweh), makes it true, or coherent? You realize that human hands wrote these Gospels, and put them together? Do you think these words wrote themselves? You realize that without Plato putting together his ideas, Jesus could have come along the same, the Old Testament would have been the same, and the Platonic features would not be there? If I wrote a book today, claiming some concept of Christianity to be equal to some random and completely different concept from Hinduism, does that equality make them equal?

Did Plato know anything about Semitic culture? Did he have any clue what his ideas would later become attached to?

I'm asking you such simple questions, I don't understand why it's so difficult to grasp. Philosophies are not equal to each other because they are placed in the same book together...they are equal because their actual ideas are non-contradictory and in union with the other. And this is not, and will never be true of, Plato's doctrine and Semitic mythology.

Again, why do you even pretend to be spiritual, anon? I'm asking you so politely. The Bible says things like "blessed are the pure in heart", "love thy neighbour as yourself". Do you embody any of this? Do you think the manner by which you speak to me here is acceptable for someone claiming (pretending, maybe) to follow God?

Here, one final Ganesha for good luck. Please try to actually respond to my questions this time, and no more insults if you can manage it.