/lit/ - Literature

>>15068111
>I used an adhom to counter adhom? Oh shit.
So both of you are in the wrong. Oh shit

>Which one? Zoromemism or Judaism?
Christianity, which sprouted from the Judaism of the time. Muh "Zoromemism." Next we'll be hearing of the Romans, then the Hellenist influences, then the Babylonian influences, and so on and so forth, rinse and repeat ad nauseam. How do you even ligate all these competing theories?

>Just shattering the confines of authority of the past. There is no need to conform to the theocratic regime, therefore no need to "believe".

Yes, I'd rather embrace the confines of the future. Additionally, the "theocratic regime" and "belief" are not synonymous

>There is no need of spirituality to rule over people and be civilized.
Yes, they've filled in the gap left by spirituality alright. But you pointed to animals as an example, who reproduce without a meaning or religion. The "civilized folk" appendage wasn't meant to make an argument, it was just banter.

>If you haven't noticed, separation of church and state isn't new, we're still here.
It's relatively new

>>15068142
Yes, but the goy gets stabbed in the back either way. At least with religion, you have an tradition trying to resist change, and that tradition may include anti-semitism. With science, beliefs are molded by the Jews. If tomorrow, an article is released saying there are no differences between races, sexes, and sexualities, then you must accept that, as received wisdom.

>>15004922
>Everything that exists has a cause
>God does not have a cause
He is the "beginning and end." He has no cause, but this does not mean he does not exist. Everything that exists has a cause, but this does not mean that something without a cause does not exist ("Let's suppose God exists, but as he is causeless, he actually does not exist"- this is absurd).

>>15004169
Even if what you said was true, there would just be a "five-nity." Some Christians believe in a trinity, others do not. There are even dinitarians. Join the queue.

Either way, I believe you've committed the fallacy of equivocation. The "Holy Spirit" is not the same as the Holy, Spiritual father. Additionally, the Father being holy and spiritual does not spontaneously generate a "Father Holy Spirit" alongside the Father" It would just make him a holy, spiritual Father.

>>13244791
Sounds like somebody needs their big tree cut down again.

>>10327185
>A fucking christian talks about destroying other cultures
Unironically off yourself