/lit/ - Literature

>>23366461


If human life, on balance, were good, past a certain point, there would be no need for the cosmos, nor, subsequently, to have children in it, anymore, since humans would have transcended it.

The fact that human life, on balance, is awful, means that everything is in order in the cosmos, and that it has not yet been built up well enough in order to be transcended —which prospect requires that the noble, virtuous, Catholical ones have heroical children.

The child, like the female, and the feline —among other things—, comes into special prominence at the beginning, and the end, of an (arch)supercycle; it is no wonder that Jesus Christ appeared as a child to his disciples, and that Christian Gnostic texts are especially so childly enthusiastic for the revival of nobility.

Folk that sincerely appreciate their elders tend to cherish children to the same degree —whether overtly, or covertly—, and vice versa.

Incidentally: Russia is one of those countries that generally exalts the beauty of all of the aforementioned archetypes, especially in literature.

>>14929667
You are merely reaffirming my previous post, albeit mistaking the effect for the cause.

I was referring to the somatic aspect in general, not to phenotype, or biogenetic composition, in particular, nor to any contrived mannerisms, which are, by the way, not contingent on sex.

The fact that females are naturally and generally more adept at raising children than males is an extension of, and contingent to, their innate psykhosomatic qualities.

>>14623087
You mean:
>That is not what: "noble" means in the vulgate.

>>14623264
>Flesh is evil but Jesus came in the flesh?
Flesh is neither: good, nor evil; flesh is merely a vessel.

>Jesus died for what exactly? Not to attone for original sin?
No; the erroneous concepts of, both: "original sin", and Jesus' death for the sins/errors of others, are typical of the nescience of judaism, and of the idleness of protestantism, respectively; Jesus' death was both: symbolic, and intrumental, its purpose being directed toward the revival of Nobility in a spiritually decaying world.

>How can a good substance be made evil? What does it mean for good or evil to be a substance at all? How can the immutable be turned mutable?
I reiterate: your spiritual ignobility, and deficiency, preclude you from recognizing: how it is that evil is an aberration of terror, what spiritual transmutation consists in, how it is that God's pattern permeates all that is living, how it is that ideas become revealed, etcetera.

>The entire New Testament is a jewish conspiracy?
No; it is a judaized corruption of Christianity.

>That has literally nothing to do with what i said about Christs coming being rooted in a Jewish context.
That is not what you said.

Instead of vulgarly projecting your own ignorance onto others, you should rather strive to learn, so that you may find the answers to the questions that you asked by thinking for yourself.

>>14623376
You are just as wilfully ignorant as the poster above you.