/lit/ - Literature

To the anons who took the time a while back to give me some real advice (including things I didn't want to hear) I just want to say thanks. You've lit a real fire under my ass. I still detest things like story and characters but I'm working through it. Currently closely following the """"story genius"""" book recommended in the OP (what a fucking terrible title though) and I am going to give the piece I'm working on a more traditional backbone. Granted, the plan is still to devolve into "nonsense," but I see now that I need to guide a reader towards the inevitable, free associative madness which will be the notochord to the story's spine.

All this that I've said will also probably end up needing to be revised and adjusted, but that's okay. Seriously, thanks. You guys gave me a new lease on my writing life.

Shitpost thread!

So I finally figured it was time to get around to reading the entire New Testament (do I really need an excuse?).

Full disclosure, I don't believe in this shit, and I wasn't going into it really with either the intention of refuting it (why bother) or of shopping around for a religion to convert to (why bother).

Nonetheless, I've noticed a few disturbing details that, to put it as mildly as possible, I have some questions about.
Now, that being said, once you start pulling on some of these threads, as with anything else, they lead to further questions. This makes the whole situation in general rather complicated and unruly, as it concerns not just the "message" of the texts in the New Testament, but the origins and structure of Christianity as a religion as such. I won't be able to give a totally exhaustive explanation of exactly what all of this seems to mean about Christianity, but most of the problem really comes into play during only one particular book in the NT: the Acts of the Apostles. Don't let yourself be lulled into complacency that what I'm going to be bringing up here is only going to be relevant to a one off book. If there's anything to the theory I'm about to lay out here, then there are arguably additional "clues" in most of Paul's letters and at least Matthew (which was written around the same time as Acts) that point towards the way I'm reading some of this bullshit.

Basically, what I'm going to be arguing here is that there is strong enough evidence within the text of the New Testament itself to suggest that Judas did not actually kill himself, as is reported in Matthew (27:3-10).

>Do you have a single fact to back that up?

1) There are two accounts of Judas’ death in the New Testament. One of them occurs in Matthew 27:3-10. The other in Acts 1:18-9 (Acts was written by Luke in case you didn’t know). There are commonplace arguments in Christian apologetics for how these two accounts don’t actually contradict each other. Here’s why that’s cope. (1/8)