/lit/ - Literature

>>11781698
New Testament
Old Testament is meh but it's still important

>>11781717
Can't tell if bait or just retarded

>66

>>11781698
Job really is the best. I think Galatians is underrated among the Epistles.

>>11781718
Fuck off Jew, he say the true.

2nd Maccabees

>>11781698
i'm gonna job u

Second Letter of St. James
Job
Matthew
Mark
Exodus

>>11781743
*James 2 that is

>>11781698
The book of Enoch.

>>11781718
I don't have a single favorite book. But New Testament in general.

>>11781698
Old Testament: Genesis
New Testament: Acts
Apocrypha: Judith
Pseudepigrapha: The Book of Enoch

>>11781730
I hate Muslims more than Jews. Their hateful book is only worthy of being toilet paper.

>>11781757
Now this is epic.

Isn't Job proof that God is a sociopathic asshole?

>>11781774
It's a story, retard

>>11781698
Daniel is underrated.

>>11781698
Good man. Job and Ecclesiastes. There's lots of good shit in there though.

New Testament Gospels cannot be overstated with how revolutionary they are. Despite them being so ingrained in Western culture to the point of being banal platitudes at this point, you can't help but be amazed and in awe at the shit Jesus says in those books; catches you off guard everytime.

>>11781774
Job is the best book at slapping down human convention for deciphering God, Nature, Infinite, insert-metaphysical-entity-here. It's brilliant

>>11781698
Song of Songs
Sometimes i treat the Bible like it's a collection of school lessons and fairy tales, probably cause that's how our culture talks about it, but Song of Songs is the best reminder of how wrong that viewpoint is. I think it's my favorite poem

>>11781774
Not really. God *does* chew out Job for giving Him lip, but that's like a king saying "do you take that tone with your sovereign?" Still merciful, considering the difference in rank.

God also tells the three blame-the-victim friends to bow to Job, and get prayed for; this is restored honor.

Also, goods x 2, and more children, and skin like a child's. These are rewards for his troubles.

Also, you are forgetting the Devil. God said, look at my man Job, he's righteous. Almost like, why dont you learn from him?

And Satan said, balls, he nice because you bankroll him. End the benefits and he will be turning his back, (just like me).

God: fine, test my man Job but dont lay a hand on his person. Satan sneaks in leprosy.exe, like a pure asshole.

By the end of the book Satan has abandoned the thread because Job's loyalty proved that God is based.

Inb4 >your post is crap because you talk like /b/tard
Please correct me with counterpoints, if you have them.

Book of Kings I & II
Judges
Samuel I & II

Basically a wikileaks.

Daniel and Revs.

You can set this stuff to symphonic metal.

>>11781757
This isn't based or redpilled

>>11781864
I know it not what you what mentioned, but I am going to post it anyway.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaGyN6nnz3Y&t=764s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO6J386KygA&t=95s

>>11781837
god let's the devil torment a man just to prove a point. god let the devil kill job's children too.

>>11781866
Why would you defend people who want to physical hurt you for not holding their same beliefs. Live and let live, people will be dammed in the very end if their way is the true way.

>>11781757
Sentiment noted, but you are not answering the OPost anon.

Avoid thread derailing /pol/lution.

>>11781698
>an old man in prison has a prolonged acid trip because he ate moldy bread and wrote down everything he saw

Even if you don't believe in Christianity Revelations is some dope reading.

>>11781872
remember listening to this in HS and masturbating to "Infinity"

>>11781873
If God were to interfere with an evil person's will, then he wouldn't be any better than the evil person in principle, now wouldn't he?

>>11781906
wut
no, if god interfered with the will of a murderer and made him stop murdering, that would not make god morally equal to the murderer

>>11781913
I am going to give you one chance to correct your mistake.

Samuel II so far

>>11781882
Islam is a different flavor of traditional, for me. Jews are just sublimely evil.

>>11781873
Valid points. I will attempt address.

God Vs Satan is the biggest trial in the cosmos. Job's suffering will always be secondary. But, because he kept his loyalty, the legal precedence is set for Satan's BTFO on the argument that "it is Logical to rebel against God". Job is the star witness for setting this precedent.

I already mentioned that Job was doubly recompensed for the vast trouble, no i wont repeat here.

Re: Job's children
Elsewhere the bible says children are arrows in a mans quiver, comfort of old age, gifts from god. So, if Satan does not get to destroy them, the trial of Jobs loyalty will always be incomplete, sue for rerereretrial.

Also, Job himself refers to the resurrection, with his own eyes seeing God in the land of the living. This means that death is not the total final concept it is in a nihilist materialist worldview. Death is temporary if you assume the religion is true, and we must assume it is in Jobs story because God and Satan are in it.

>>11781698
*73

It's between Genesis, Wisdom, Psalms, Mark, John, and James

>>11781774
Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind:

2 “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?
3 Gird up your loins like a man,
I will question you, and you shall declare to me.

4 “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements—surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
6 On what were its bases sunk,
or who laid its cornerstone
7 when the morning stars sang together
and all the heavenly beings[a] shouted for joy?

8 “Or who shut in the sea with doors
when it burst out from the womb?—
9 when I made the clouds its garment,
and thick darkness its swaddling band,
10 and prescribed bounds for it,
and set bars and doors,
11 and said, ‘Thus far shall you come, and no farther,
and here shall your proud waves be stopped’?

>based

>>11781872
Thank you to exposing me. I'm on youtube right now and liking the music.

>>11781906
I'm not sure about that.

However, free will is a gift of God, and "the Lord gives and repents not." So i think God doesnt override freewill not because that is evil, but on principle of not taking back what He gives.

>>11781698
for me, its the McChicken

>>11782012
You say you aren't sure about it and then you more or less confirm why I'm right. Tf?

>>11782095
I meant that i'm not sure if overriding freewill is not done because inherently wrong.

I only suppossed that God doesn't do it. Kind of like saying "i dont eat brocolli"; doesnt merit or demerit brocolli in itself.

>>11781698
The Torah.

>>11782124
Overriding free will is wrong. It's that simple

>>11781851
my man

>>11781698
I can't pick a favorite but I've really been enjoying Ecclesiastes recently. Surprisingly, it's been helping me get through my depression. I only say surprisingly because it has a reputation for being dark. Vanity of vanities, all is vanity.

Tobit is epic
Daniel is epic
For a few verses, lamentations
James is probably the best written from a modern perspective.
All of the gospels except Matthew.

>>11782505
What's wrong with Matthew?

For me, it's the Gospel according to John.

>>11781730
the NT is more Jewish than the OT

>>11781982
This

>>11782155
Prison is full of overridden freewill anon.

Inb4 " they are punisged for overridig the freewill of others" there is still the question of "victimless crimes", such as consuming child porn, adultery, corporate crime, a laundry list.


I will gladly accept your posit that overriding freewill is wrong, if you can offer a recommendation for how to punish "victimless crime" without overriding the freewill of the criminal.

1st Corinthians

>>11782550
>consuming child porn
>victimless crime
What about the children anon?

>>11782550
Absolutely based and correct post.

Wasn’t sure if you were trying to discredit God, so I went through the post chain... and....

Absolutely based believer also.

>>11782553
Thats why i said consumers, not producers.

>>11782556

Thank you anon. :)

I try to keep my credit/discredit mode off when it comes to the bible though. Unhelpful, leads to unsatisfactory answers regardless who has the last word.

>>11782649
Well it’s a recording of what God has done after all

No worries

>>11781698
Isaiah

>>11781873
Alternative view:

-Devil offers to rekt a man to prove *his* point
-God allows it, man proves devil wrong, achievement unlocked 《Hero Of Faith》
-God ctrl+z devil's cancerpost, ctrl+c+p+p Job's GP , HP and NPChildren.

>>11781750
what is that

>>11781906
That's bullshit though. God doesn't just allow the satan to fuck with Job, he TELLS him to do it. And he initially orders him not to harm Job physically, which shows that he was willing to set limits on what the satan could do, he just suspended those limits to allow Job to be fucked with.

>>11782724
Granted, God allowed Satan to afflict Job.

BUT

This allowance is only allowed because God's own honor and by extension the orderly rule of the universe (by God; as at time of challenge) is at stake.

If God said, FTFY dont touch my boy Job, Satan can from then on and forever say " lolmao, God is worshipped because He BRIBES and BULLIES you faggots. He is not worth worshipping, and you are all larpfags trying to cope by volcucking. Topkek, have fun with your circlejerk." With this one argument Satan can obtain full license to break every law without repercussion.

Yes Job got shat on. But he was not shortchanged for it, the stakes justified it, and God had faith in Job enough to risk the challenge on his performance

>>11781750
REEEEEE NOT CANON

>>11782855
God did it to protect his reputation against Satan? Satan has no power over God, that's not a good reason. In any case, ha-satan of Job is a prosecuting angel, not a personification of evil.

>>11783077
Ackchyually...

What's the best version of the bible to read?

>>11783130
Be warned: that's a contentious question and you'll get a dozen equally forceful recommendations.

>>11783117
based ethiopians desu

>>11781698

I like this part when God made Hosea married a prostitute so that he could understand how He feel about Israel

>>11781698

"APOCALIPSIS", BECAUSE IT IS THE ONLY ONE THAT IS NOT JUDAIZED ANTICHRISTIAN DRIVEL, THEREFORE, IT IS NOT ACTUALLY MY FAVOURITE ONE, RATHER, IT IS THE ONLY ONE THAT I LIKE.

>>11783140
KJV actually is what I was thinking to get, where does the "international version fit in this?

>>11783178
It's intermediate between dynamic and formal equivalence, and is protestant.

>>11783184
Thank you anon

>>11782576
consumers are as much to blame as producers

While I think there is something great in all of the books of the Bible, I have to say Romans and not just because the 11th chapter refutes the outright heresy my church’s former pastor espoused.

The Letter to the Romans is Paul’s greatest literary work and contains everything the lost needs to know for salvation and everything the Christian needs to know to live his/her life. Highlights include the 6, 8, 11, and 15th chapters.

>no esther
wow you guys are plebs

>>11783388
Are they both guilty? Of course both are guilty. But the viewer has commited a victimless crime; the one who has laid hands on the child is not him, but the pornographer.

A consumer is to be blamed for giving a money incentive to an exploitative activity.

CP is more a perverse hobby, done mostly for lulz. Ergo, many cases not incentivised by money, especially P2P sharing.

It is a victimless crime because it does not incentivise producers. Also, consumers are consuming copies if .webm, not real human beings.

If we had a fifty yearold webm, copied 100,000 times, each copy cannot be worth the life of 1 real child. It is worth ~0.001 of 0.5 a real child.

As such, will you still punish each consumer the same as each producer? This cannot be: drug addicts are punished much less than drug pushers; CP gooners cannot be punished the same as an actual pedorapist pornographer.

>>11783157
It's especially ironic because a few books later Amos curses a rival prophet by saying "may your wife become a prostitute."

Any other books for Christians?
Currently reading St. Augustine's Confessions

>>11783117
No, not reputation. Honor is a different idea; khavod, weightiness, glory. If you talk down to me, that is called not giving me honor.

I refer you to Satan's utterences.
God says: "where have you come from?" As in, you have no place, are not welcome here.

Satan says "Oh, here and there, all over." Dodgy, smugass answer.

Again God says "You see my righteous servant Job? Hes the best."
Satan poohpoohs: "skin for skin; take away the goods and he will curse you to the face." For someone talking to God Almighty, surely this can be put mpre courteously? Theres insinuations on all sorts of things just in these two exchanges.

Like i already said, these insinuations need to be addressed because "justice is the foundation of His throne", Psalms somewhere. If God can be demonstrated as unrightous, He has to give up the throne. (Satan has a vested interest)

If God is restricted in action only by powerlimit, He can do everything. But God is also limited by righteousness, example, he cannot lie: "God is no man that he should lie." If any evil can be proven of Him, then he is unfit to judge anyone.

>>11783771
Add:

Think of producing CP as robbery with assault and manslaughter in coursw of crime; think of consuming CP as buying/accepting stolen goods.

The robber gets 25-life no parole in securemax peni as a sentence; the possesaor pf stolen goods get 2-5 at lowsec correctional. World of difference in senten ing implies world of difference in the Nature of the crime.

gospel of judas
he he he

>>11781698
The Gospel of John is the most beautiful piece of literature ever written.

>>11783833
>If God can be demonstrated as unrightous, He has to give up the throne. (Satan has a vested interest)
God cannot give up his throne in any sense, that's a non-starter. Why does God have to answer a simple challenge by satan, who does nothing in Job without God granting him permission.

>But God is also limited by righteousness, example, he cannot lie: "God is no man that he should lie." If any evil can be proven of Him, then he is unfit to judge anyone.
That's a debated point of theology. Some see God as greater if he has the capacity to lie but doesn't because he's righteous. Anyway, God DOES lie in the Bible, he sends deceiving spirits into the Jerusalem prophets on the eve of the Babylonian invasion so they'll prophecy peace.

>>11783140
Chart's pretty bad desu.

>>11781989
Based, god-fearing, and enlightened post

>>11783560
Just read 6 on your recommendation. Thanks a lot.

choosing favorite parts of the bible is a sin.

James

>>11782550
Prisoners are overriders of freewill, and not to mention, is God the person sending people to prison? No. I'm not the one who gives a shit about victimless crime, and neither does god. Unless you're saying that God is your state law enforcement

>>11781774
maybe if Job wasnt the most wealthiest and honored man in his community for the majority of his life

>>11784354
I second this
the way it's written it's hard to believe he fabricated any of those experiences

>>11781698
Just got this neat folio society apocrypha for 30 bucks to go with my illustrated black and white bible by barry moser.

>>11781774
I still find the disposing of jobs family like nothing to be troubling.

Proverbs.

>>11781873
Job is a work of fiction.
none of that actually happened.

>>11784532
If there is no way for God to lose the throne, please explain the "justice is the foundation of his throne" , or the reason for the temptation if Christ, or any Satanic rebellion.

The point is, Satan acts because the theoretical possibility *does* exist that God can be unseated. "I will ascend and be above the Stars of God, like the Most High". Purely insisting it cannot be done is just dogmatic.

Re: God lying
Granted, debatable. I have pulled out my substantiating bit; now i will address yours.

>sending lying spirits
Observe the circumstances underwhich they are sent:
-israel has worshipped foreign gods, "no gods at all" , vis, lying spirits. They've been wanting to come, but Yahweh was holding them back. He HAS to let them come because of the Law covenant he has with Israel: pursue foreign gods, or "fail to continue to keep all this law" , and you will get rekt with every rekt in this book of Law.
-provisions have been made for lying prophets who lie saying that "thus says the Lord". Stone them. Vis, God does not endorse lying prophets.
-israel by this point already has lots of lying prophets because of the peoples "itching ears". Ref the rebukes in Lamentations "they prophesy peace, peace when there is no peace"
-God prepares "even the wicked for the day of destruction." The wicked can refer either unfaithful israel or lying spirits, or both. God is not wrong or condemned by His preparation; rahter it sounds like He is being glorified for it.

job is the only book with self completion. Others are not very relevant.

>>11783130
ESV

>>11783815
Just about anything C. S. Lewis did is good. The first chapter of Problem of Pain is probably the best thing he ever wrote.
Kierkegaard is cool.
Boethius' Consolation of Philosophy is a really good book, and not one I see recommended very often.
Vergil Eclogue 4 is neat because of it could apply to Christ.
Augustine is good. Maybe try City of God after Confessions.
Eusebius' History of the Church is p cool.
Karl Barth wrote some good stuff.
G. K. Chesterton is a cool guy to read.

Anyone else wish they were born as a Medieval scribe?

>>11785551
God sends Satan and sinners to hell. That is the prison-idea in its perfected form.

God is not state law enforcement in the sameway that the president is not: God authorises. "You have no power if it was not granted you from above" says Christ to pilate. State Lawmen are not a personification of God, but an extension of God's will.

Do you say that God does not care about victimless crime? The majority of sin is victimless according to christ "if you lusted after a woman in your heart, it is adultery; if you harbour hate for your brother, it is murder." Also, refer to Moses' era, during the 40 years: sin of Achan, ten unbelieving spies, touching the holy mountain, grumbling about quail, mariam grumbling about Moses ethiopian wife. All these are victimless crimes, in so far as no person or property was harmed. But all were punished severely by Yahweh.

Victimless crime is a secular term, but that does not mean it is not sin. Sin is too broad a definition, and i am trying to narrow it, to be fair for the sake of discussion.

If you are the poster, you still have not reccomended a punoshment for victimless crime (aka, the most subtle sins) that do not override freewill.

>>11787308
>t. someone who hasn't read any those books

>>11785551
>i dont care about victimless crime and (((neither does God)))
This is pure claim. Not substantiated by bible.

Will you cite any bible that backs this up pls?

Punishimg victimless crime is important, because it stops the argument "so long as it hurts no one i can keep doing it". This is not a biblical idea at all; secular liberal materialist humanist utilitarian, but not biblical.

>>11785758
Granted. I have a problem with it too.

But since resurrection exists for Job in this book, and by extension it also exist for
his family, death is not permanant. He'll see everybody again after a little bit.

>>11785849
That is one way to read it. Nevertheless, the discussion is about in-that-universe speculation.

Hell is only a temporary purgation of sin from those who refuse to repent in life.

>>11785551
I have already inb4'd your idea that persons in prison overrode the freedom of others, by saying that there is such a thing as victimless crime.

Refer please.

>>11785849
You cannot say with absolute certainty it is fake.

You can only suspend your belief.

>>11787847
"They will be thrown into the lake of fire, for ever and ever"

"Fear not death, but he who can destroy (not chastise) body and soul in hell"

"Fire that does not quench, and where the worm dieth not"

All these and others hint that hell is not corrective, but punitive.

Please cite text that suggests hell is corrective please.

>>11787920
If hell is a permanent punishment of evil then it means that the existence of evil is eternal and will never actually be overcome by God.

>>11787937
This is like saying, even if police catch and courts sentence a criminal, because he still exists, the State has not won.

The State has won a very complete victory as opposed to merely deleting/erasing a criminal: it forces the criminal from all the priviledge of free existance, AND forces him to continue in this suffering state.

Likewise God and Hell: God's victory is complete because He has both legally and forcefully defeated evil, AND now He puts them in a Hell server, with no option of ragequit. I think that's pretty complete pwnage.

Coleridge said the book of Romans is the greatest poem ever written, so Revelations

>>11781982
Jesus was a Jew you prejudice dolt

>>11787978
The difference is that God has the ability to completely overcome evil and turn into it into good. The state likewise is only a temporal means of pursuing order, not the ultimate retribution which belongs to God, but you are saying they are fundamentally the same. What a joke.
>Likewise God and Hell: God's victory is complete because He has both legally and forcefully defeated evil, AND now He puts them in a Hell server, with no option of ragequit. I think that's pretty complete pwnage.
Imagine how immature and spiteful you have to be to think something like this about people being placed into eternal suffering.

>>11787978
>God has the ability to turn all evil into good
Not the biblical God, no. This might be true of another religion's God (or the "actual God" whoever he might be), but not Yahweh.

Yahweh can try to get an evil person to repent and change sides; if they persist and are resolute, like Milton's Satan, they get to stay evil, with consequences. That's free will.

Now, you allege my immaturity because I seem ITT to believe in the puritanical God and the kind of Hell that exists in renaissance woodcuts.

This is incorrect: i have repeatedly cited bible for my portrait of God. What have you done except to say, in essence "i dont like it / seems unreasonable to me = it is not true"? Have you cited ANY bible, up to your last post?

I paint the Christian God with the Christian bible; that is the only way i can do it.

If, without citing any bible to make your counterclaims on what God is or is not, i might suggest that you are describing your own God, not the biblical one.

>>11788017
Pls see
>>11788114

>>11788017

>sentences set by state is to maintain order.

Not solely. Victimless crimes tend not to disrupt order; see CP consumer


Also,
>being put in hell is eternal suffering

Incorrect: hell is eternal PUNISHMENT. If retribution belongs to God, as you say, when He gives it, it is JUST suffering.

"What boast is it for you if you bear up under a beating silently, which you got because of an offense?"

>>11785114
"All scripture is God-breathed and suitable for instruction"

Cite bible on where picking faves is a sin, pls.

>>11787847
Even in Catholic thinking, Hell and Purgatory are totally different places.

Purfatory is, yes, a place to clean up soiled souls.

But Hell is for the wicked, Satan, and the angels.

You are conflating words with the wrong concepts.

>>11781737
thats not part of the bible, heretic

>>11788017
I apologize; you have cited some bible, although not sufficient to back up every assertion made.

>>11788313
REEE FALSE EMPEROR

>>11785061
^u^

>tfw Leviticus

>>11788013
The jews then are not the jews now

if i want to read the bible, where should i start? can i skip the old testament? read the new then the old or start on one of the books in the middle?

>>11788545
>if i want to read the bible, where should i start? can i skip the old testament? read the new then the old or start on one of the books in the middle?

Number one, use the King James Version. Modern translations are garbage. I personally would start with Genesis but some of the parts from Leviticus and onwards can be a bit of a slog.

If you're wanting an easier read, start with the Book of John. I have no idea what your beliefs are but John is the only book in the whole Bible written for unbelievers, to tell them how to go to Heaven. Every other book relies on the assumption that you're already a Christian (and often with a solid knowledge of other books).

John 20:31
>But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

>>11781774

god is depicted that way throughout most of the old testament

>>11788545

>i want to skim one of the most influential books ever written, but i have no problem reading imageboard shitposting every day

>>11788600
>god is depicted that way throughout most of the old testament

It's the exact same guy in the New Testament. Either he's hateful in both or he's loving in both. Revelation is probably more negative and filled with God casting more people into hell than any other book, and it's New Testament.

Leviticus and Deuteronomy are the two big "hate" books atheists love running to show how evil God is, and yet Jesus quoted Deuteronomy more than any other book in the Bible. In fact when he was asked what the great commandment of the law was, he quoted Leviticus 19:18 and Deuteronomy 6:5.

Mark 12:28-34
>And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all?
>And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
>And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.
>And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.
>And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:
>And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.
>And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God.

Question for believers in this thread: how does one reconcile the idea that some people are born just to go to eternal hell? I happened to have been born in a country where most people are Christians. But I have close friends in other countries that have had completely different religious developments throughout history, and in present day a very small minority of these countries are Christians. Far from being mired in degeneracy, some of these other countries have a much more stable social order than my own country. Of course, there are many other factors to that besides religious belief, but these are good people who apparently do nothing wrong besides not believe in the god of Christianity.

My point is, according to the bible, many of these otherwise wonderful people will be cast into eternal darkness just for not being born in the right place at the right time. You might argue that "we have the internet now, there's no excuse, you can just read the bible online" but I think there's no denying that people in majority Christian countries have an automatic leg up on people in countries that have a different religious background. So what gives? It seems just like a modernized version of the OT God favoring the Israelites arbitrarily.

>>11788677
P.S. I'm not trying to be snarky or get all "checkmate, theists," I'm genuinely looking for an good explanation of this because it seems like there's so much good that can come from Christian faith, but I just have a hard time with the concept of an omnibenevolent god who would let this happen.

>>11788677
>>11788687
For one, as Christians we're commanded to go out into all the world and spread the Gospel to every single person. Now that doesn't mean you get some evangelist who personally pleads for your soul for weeks on end until you finally convert, but at a minimum you should at least get a vague understanding that other beliefs are out there and if you seek the truth you will find it (e.g. a Christian actually will sit down with you and tutor you through what it all means). And outside of NK and most Muslim countries that is already true for most of the world, so even just on that basis you already have a reasonable potentiality for the majority of the world pop to become a Christian if they desire too.

You also are assuming that you get a big leg-up living in a "Christian" country but the reality is that it isn't nearly as much of a practical advantage as you would think, at least for 99% of people.

You will knock doors in Christian countries, see people on the couch with their xbox controller and bong, and have them tell you that they're too busy to take 5 minutes out of their life to see how they could know for sure whether they're going to heaven when they die. Most people have absolutely no interest in things that pertain to God, including most ostensibly "religious" people.

John 3:19
>And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

I believe with all of my heart that any person who is genuinely seeking the truth will 100% be given a clear presentation of the Gospel before they die. Most people couldn't care less so even given your concern about large chunks of the world not being given much knowledge doesn't bother me in the sense that it's mostly on them simply not caring, not some flaw of God.

Matthew 7:7-8
>Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
>For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

Hebrews 11:5
>But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sj3TvlcVUzo

>>11788677
>>11788687

God never says that he'll only save people that have publicly subscribed to a single religious order. Many times in the Bible, God is presented as knowing the heart and saving people or condemning them based on the innermost intentions of their character, parts of them that are not obvious to other humans. For example the thief on the cross never went to church or called himself a Christian. He's a good example of someone who never lived a desirable life but was saved based on his will to be with Jesus. It's an issue that is expounded greatly in the Bible, in particular by the prophets and the majority of the New Testament.
Also the idea of an eternal hell is also debatable since it's seen mostly as a metaphor for a life of wicked behavior having no peace, or as the state of being apart from God. For instance, the devil is prophesied to be thrown into a bottomless pit when God saves his people, signifying a state of complete disconnect from the glory experienced from being a child of God as a punishment for his destruction.
As a believer I don't have to reconcile any ideas about who goes to hell and who goes to heaven based on the trust I have that a God who searches the heart of humanity would be able to make the decision with wisdom that I don't have. When I meet non believers who are good people with good actions and meet believers who have bad intentions and bad actions, then it helps me understand that God doesn't just live in people based on their upbringing or backgrounds, but he can live in anyone from anywhere.

>>11788114
pls refer me to the exact quotes proving God cannot (as opposed to will not)

>>11785753
Very nice.
>>11788807
>steven anderson
Wew lad.
>>11783140
Charts always shit on NRSV or just shove it into the ecumenical which is fine I guess but RSV-CE2 is highly lauded by translators, seminarians, historians, etc within the church. Also almost nobody mentions Navarre which is expensive as fuck but probably the most commentary/explanation content dense edition of the Bible you can get your hands on.

>>11788807
Fair point about how living in a Christian country doesn't automatically give you a better shot, but it's interesting you brought up North Korea. That is a country where the chances of someone being exposed to the gospel are very low. We can also think about some of the few uncontacted tribes that are left in Africa or South America. They aren't a large percentage of the population by any means, but these are still real human souls that are all but assured to be doomed for eternity, unless God makes an exception for them. And if he does make an exception, how much of an exception is he willing to make (obviously this question is pretty rhetorical)? And if not, why not?

I suppose in your view, some people from these isolated regions will still receive the gospel despite overwhelming odds. And in regards to your imagery of an xbox controller and a bong, I can tell you have a secularized modern western world in mind, which is maybe Christian in name only for most people. But still, it would seem that the odds of salvation for a present-day North Korean are a lot lower than say someone who was born in the Roman Empire at a time when virtually everyone around you was Christian and you would be exposed to Christian imagery everywhere.

>>11788897
>Wew lad.
Don't throw stones sweetheart.

>>11781698
Ecclesiastes and Psalms.

>>11787868
>>11787839
you guys are fucking idiots
The story of Job originated in ancient Mesopotamia and was adopted by ancient Jews who reupholstered the narrative to center on YHWH. that's not even uncommon knowledge, read literally any study bible or history on the book. its literally one of the oldest books in the world and one of the most thoughouly studied.
Job was not a real guy.
Satan doesn't hang out with God in heaven.
God never told a suffering man to shut the fuck up when he asked why he was suffering.
its a fucking allegory

>>11788908
Unlike modern American meme Baptists, denominations like Catholicism don't fall apart when one individual in them does something silly, even a Pope. Enjoy Anderson while he lasts you got another 30 years before you have to pack your bags and find another man in a suit as spiritual authority unless he appoints his son as a successor and you unironically support the spiritual equivalent of a hereditary dictatorship.

>>11788831
This is interesting because it seems to be a pretty different interpretation from what >>11788807
is saying. It seems more logical (although I am aware that logic can be a trap when considering the nature of divinity) that an omnibenevolent god would make some exceptions and offer salvation to some "good" (whatever it means) Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, etc. But a strict textualist might (with scriptural examples such as >>11787920
) say that unfortunately this is a bit too optimistic, that belief is the only true path to salvation, and that hell is definitely real and eternal.

Of course, the question of how literally to take various bible passages is as old as the faith itself, so I don't expect that we'll turn up an answer right here and now. Still, I would be interested to hear more scriptural examples to support your assertion.

>>11788907
>And if he does make an exception, how much of an exception is he willing to make (obviously this question is pretty rhetorical)? And if not, why not?

The justice of God is pretty clear in he Bible, and in order for him to be just he has to apply the same metric to everyone.

>And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
>And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

When we die every single one of us will have to make an account of our lives before God. Now 99% of people/religions (including most "Christian" denominations) have this hazy conception that your good gets put on one side of a scale, and your bad on another, and if the good outweighs the bad you get in(Now obviously people will squawk when you frame it like that but painting with a super broad brush that functionally covers soteriology for 99% of people/religions).

But God says we actually all deserve to go to hell.
Romans 6:23
>For the wages of sin is death

Unless they're a complete sociopath, everyone recognizes that they're sinners. And the conception of Christian sin covers people who aren't informed of Christianity whatsoever as most of God's rules are universally acknowledges, so that you would be completely without excuse.
e.g.
James 4:17
>Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

Now God doesn't want to send people to hell, but Heaven is a perfect place and it would violate his justice to allow sinners into Heaven. That's why Jesus is required to go to Heaven. God sent his Son and walked among us in the form of Jesus of Nazareth, lived a sinless life, and died a substitutionary death and spent 3 days in hell so that he paid that "wage" for our sins.

I deserve to go to hell, you deserve to go to hell, everyone does. But God loved us and he threw us a life preserver where through his mercy we can be saved and go to Heaven too.

Now as to the second part about NK, that's where evangelism comes in. I mean yeah it's true that not everyone has an equal opportunity to get the gospel, but people also die at wildly different ages even within a country, and dying at 18 substantially lowers your opportunities to hear the gospel than someone who dies at 98.

That's why the Bible says
Isaiah 55:6
>Seek ye the LORD while he may be found

God will save you just as you are, but at the same time you can't realistically expect help if you never bother even seeking. Now a lot of people do get reached who are just sitting on their hands, but again that's because of soul winners carrying out the command to spread the Gospel and their are very, VERY few who even bother doing that.

>>11789011
>I mean yeah it's true that not everyone has an equal opportunity to get the gospel

I guess this gets at the heart of the part of the faith I'm stuck on.

>people also die at wildly different ages even within a country, and dying at 18 substantially lowers your opportunities to hear the gospel than someone who dies at 98.

Same idea, by some strict interpretation of the text, babies who are aborted or die in infancy never really get a chance at salvation. But then again, I've heard even some of the most conservative/textualist evangelical preachers say that the Lord takes these factors into account on judgment day and saves babies who were aborted, which I am not aware of having been directly addressed in scripture.

Anyway, thanks for talking with me today anon. If there is a heaven, I hope some day we both see each other there and all of our friends and loved ones too.

>>11788294
In Catholicism, purgatory is only for baptized persons who died without mortal sin but with venial sin. Any unbaptized person, or any baptized person who dies in mortal sin, goes to hell.

Ecclesiastes is very comfy

>>11788611
i never said i wanted to skim through it, every time i mention reading it people give different suggestions on where to start and alot say start at the new testament

theres also what >>11788581 said about having a solid knowledge of the other books

>>11788294
No, I'm using the terms differently on purpose. I am not a Catholic and am not bound to use their definitions.

>>11789078
>which I am not aware of having been directly addressed in scripture.

I know it's in Isaiah, but I can't remember the verses. But yes all babies go to heaven as they aren't sinners.

"Original Sin" as Catholics teach it is unbiblical (big surprise), as the bible is crystal clear you get held accountable for your specific actions when you stand before God.
>and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to THEIR works.
i.e. not Adam's works.

Babies do not have sins that they have a wage to pay for, so they go to heaven.

Genesis 2:16-17
>And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
>But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Now if Adam had somehow (physically) died before that point he would have went to Heaven as he had no sins prior to make payment for.

Hell is only the standard place for people to go when they die insofar as we're simply all sinners. But examples like the hopelessly retarded (think: vegetables) or infants obviously do not have agency and cannot control their actions.

>>11789126
Heaven is only for the righteous, you twerp. An infant is not righteous because it has no merit. It has no personal merit from good deeds and it has no imputed merit from Christ. It cannot go to heaven. Stop trying to spread your nonsensical personal interpretations.

>>11789181
Some hot scriptures you have supporting your argument.

>>11789197
Show me anything that says that a person who has no righteousness in any sense can go to heaven.

>>11789203
Define your terms.

Show me a clear definition of "righteousness" from the bible.

Or just use
>nonsensical personal interpretations
which is what you seem to prefer while accusing me of it.


>But when David saw that his servants whispered, David perceived that the child was dead: therefore David said unto his servants, Is the child dead? And they said, He is dead.
>Then David arose from the earth, and washed, and anointed himself, and changed his apparel, and came into the house of the Lord, and worshipped: then he came to his own house; and when he required, they set bread before him, and he did eat.
>Then said his servants unto him, What thing is this that thou hast done? thou didst fast and weep for the child, while it was alive; but when the child was dead, thou didst rise and eat bread.
>And he said, While the child was yet alive, I fasted and wept: for I said, Who can tell whether God will be gracious to me, that the child may live?
>But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.


Hmm...
>I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.

David, who in Acts 13:22 and 1 Samuel 13:14 was labelled
>a man after mine own heart
by God and was very clearly saved and on his way to Heaven, knew that he would go to his dead baby one day.

This of course parallels identically with Romans 3 where it says that none of us are righteous as a consequence of our willful sins, and since babies are not sinners they do not go to hell, especially considering fell was specifically created for those that defy God to go, as stated in Matthew 25:41.
>Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels

I get bored of arguing with Catholics as you debate with the same wormy dishonesty as liberals where everything I post needs 20,000 verses backing it up but you can post literally nothing or take one out of conext verse that flies in the face of everything I posted, address nothing, and go
>lol well this is what the one true church teaches, haha take that heretic
>DOOS BULT
so if you have nothing intelligent to say don't bother even responding.

>>11788581
What are your objectives for reading the bible anon? Will recommend based on answer.

>>11788866
Will attempt to strongly suggest (not prove; i cannot conclusively nail anything down).

Prev mentioned "God is not a man that he should lie"

And hebrew 6:18 "thus by two immutable things it were ((impossible)) for God to lie..."

If there is any precedent of God lying, regardless of what the issue is, there is no point demanding that we have faith in Him. If I, myself, ever find strong suggestion of God lying in the bible or IRL (eg, sending a legit prophet who "thus sayeth the Lord" a lie) I will be first to publish it.

>>11788916
An allegory not based IRL would have been far shorter with one or two lessons; the whole exchange between Job V Friends, and Job V God would not have been this long.

The story is unlikely to be co-opted from early antiquity by late religious jews, for the fixation on "holiness" or "set-apartness" they have. They will make distinctions and not conflate gods like Romans did of Greeks. "our God is not like these Gods" numbers 86:8.

Also, if there was a cooption, it should be even easier for jews to get along with any of the other nations they fought with if they would JUST SAY your god is my God. But this is not the case. Even saying "this gold calf made by aaron is my god" or "this bronze snake moses ordered made is my god" got them in trouble. How can it be that religious Jews, knowing all this, would later take up the narrative of a foreign god and retcon it into Yahweh? Very unlikely.

Also, by the same argument, any religious text tropes used can be called a "cooption". Such as Divine Strongman (samson, heracles, that mideast one that went to underqorld for his friend) , World Flood, The Creation of World and Man. Etc. Everything can be swept under the rug and ignored then, since all of it must be rubble coopted from dead civilisations.

If you knew the jews and how anal about keeping the word of God pure they are, you should not think this likely.

>>11789088
Thank you for the correction.

I was informed by Dante on what Purgatory is for, and I took him seriously barring poetic license for discriptions.

Nevertheless, my point for that post stands: that Purg and Hell proper are different districts.

>>11789109
Very well, although you might have stated your purpose. I was left quite confused by your usage.

What is your purpose?

>>11788677
>11788677
"Those that are without the Law perish without it"

"Those that sin in ignorance are punished with few strokes"

"Sodom and Gomorah (that did not know Law or Christ) will rise up on the last day and condemn you (the Pharisees who are experts of law and prophecy and have Abraham's covenant, but yet reject christ)"

God will be fair.

More than that, He will also be merciful.

"Any that call on the Name of the Lord shall be saved."

And

"You will not see me (Christ) again until you say blessed is he who comes in Lord's name (barukh haba hashem Adonai)"

The Jewish Christians today literally say the invocation.

Don't worry for those people who have not known the Lord. They are not your problem.

"If I want him to remain until then (the last day) what is it to you (Peter)? You follow me."

Psalm 95 "if today you hear His voice, do not harden your heart."

I cannot tell you what "His voice" is; I suppose only you and He know.

I can only propose, as per Ps95, that you don't block it out.

>>11788866
My private speculation is God cannot lie because His Word is so powerful that anything He says automatically comes true.

"Let there be light ("lehi orr", Light, Be) said God, and there was light.

God did not "make" light, He just said/declared it.

This might be why Satan was twmpting Jesus with "just worship me (call me Lord)": i think Satan might have gotten permabuffed just by the declaration.

>>11789378
Hello anon. :)

I'm with you.

Even so, to paraphrase 1cor 9:19

To the wews i will be a wew, and to the neets a neet, so that by any means i might save some.

>>11789088
anyone want to spoonfeed me info on the sins

>>11790414
What would you like to know specifically?

Its a huge entry.

>>11790420
which sins are venial or mortal. also i heard once that the only sin that cannot be forgiven is blaspheming the Holy spirit, is this true? so if someone were to say 'dam the holy psirit' and mean it they are fucked forever?

>>11781698
I like Mark and John

>>11784244
Gospel of Darwin
Gospel of Crowley
Gospel of Nietzsche
Gospel of Hitchins
Gospel of Greene (48 Laws Greene)
Gospel of Marx

hel hel hel

The Gospel of Thomas

Unironcally Genesis t. STEM

>>11789203
The story of the thief on the cross is a good example
and why would a baby go to hell without any knowledge of sin or of God's law?

>>11790428
blasphemy of the holy spirit is the short way of saying the person was stubborn and didnt listen to their knowledge of what's right and wrong and instead decided to act out of selfishness. Not only do they act out of selfishness, but they never ask for forgiveness and they constantly justify their action

>>11790428
I have not examined the matter sufficienly to tell you which sins are venial or mortal.

I can offer only

"He that has broken the least (of the Law) has broken the whole Law"

And the Mosaic injunction "CONTINUE in ALL this Law (613 articles) " or be "cursed with every curse in this Book until you are destroyed". Small or big sin seems unimportant insofar as you will be condemned either way; the only protection is the Sin offering for Jews, Christ for Christians.

As for the "unpardonable sin" , it is not given for us to know when God will deem an individual person as having commited it. However i have a few comforting observations.

A) Saul the slayer, pedigree Jew, taught by Gargamel (a very respected rabbi) was catching and sending firstgen Christians for the slaughter; God picked him to be the apostle to the gentiles, and he wrote about half of NT. If theres hope for Saul, there's hope for you.

B) Jesus was warning the pharisees when he spoke of "unpardonable sin". The pharisees, apart from being professional torahthumpers, of abraham's covenant, ALSO saw the cripple healing, removal of leprosy, exorcism, and were always beaten by Jesus in live debate. In spite of this, they can deny Him. Even Ben the Booze and Slaggy Sally (publicans and prostitutes) saw the miracles and believed; you'd have to be a determined asshead to refuse to believe in the face of everything. And the pharisees WERE objectively assheads: Jesus called them sons of vipers, sons of the devil. Regardless, they still crucified him, whereas you are troubled by the very idea of a permanb& sin. You are probably not one of the unpardonable, anon.

C) Jesus said to God at the cross "forgive them for not knowing what they do" This included pharisees; even if you sinned like them, there is a provision just for you.

C)i) you may say the pharisees knew wth they were doing; they knew Jesus was a miracleman who battlerapped like a total boss, and they crucified him because he was boss. However "they do not know what they are doing" can be stretched to apply to them because "you do not know me, nor my Father (OG)". Ergo, the forgiveness is there, if you want it.

God has a record of being very gracious. Recall the Exile period: they had to break Commandment One for sooo many kings before it finally happened, and even then, not "all the curses in this book of Law" was sent on them. God's pulling a lot of punches and offering forgibs. The Israelites only had to cry out at any time and "The Lord could not bear their misery any more."

>>11791176
Add:

D) read the account of Pharaoh Vs Moses. Pharaoh's behavior of continuous trolling in spite of repeated b& is a prime example of the kind of behavior leading to permab&.

>>11787824
hey fuck off yes i have

>>11790334
>My private speculation is God cannot lie because His Word is so powerful that anything He says automatically comes true.

This is backed up by scripture.

Titus 1:2
>In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began

John 1:1-5
>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
>The same was in the beginning with God.
>All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
>In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
>And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

>>11787847
What is your religion anon.

You dont sound like any Christian of any denomination I've ever heard of.

Either that or you barely ever read ypur Bible.

>you know neither the Word nor the power of God

>>11789203
David, on the cribdeath of his son with Bathsheba, said

"I will go to him, but he will not come back to me."

David is 《Man after God's Own Heart 》so it is safe to say he's going to heaven.

If David "shall go to him", it should mean the dead son is in heaven, ot at least the waiting list in Sheol.

Also, like another poster mentioned, the thief on the cross. He was a rioter, robber, murderer, by varying accounts. Yet his request just to be remembered by Christ in his kingdom was answered:

"THIS DAY you will be with Me in Paradise." So that's at least one precedent of someone with "no righteoysness" getting into Heaven.


Let me add as well that human righteoysness does not give any wntry to heaven. God says:
"Your RIGHTEOUSNESSES are as filthy rags." The rags mentioned are sanitary cloths, for menstrual blood, which is very unclean according to Leviticus. The value to Yahweh of human righteousness is not enough to finally save him.

Also, you are not the correct authority to deem yourself righteous: "every man is right in his own eyes." As such, every man left to himself will surely think he is a pretty cool guy.

Also, IF man can be righteous enough for God, if man can faultlessly and fully keep the Law, the sin offering of Judaism and Jesus' death at the cross are pointless, stupid waste. Is this indeed your position?

>>11792958
>>11791176
>>11790405
>>11790334
>>11790178
>>11789579
>>11788294
>>11788252
>>11788114
>>11787978
>>11787920
>>11787815
>>11786946
>>11782855
>>11782550
>>11781989

Anyanon wanting to split hairs in private, all welcome to call my dummy:

AMAimafag (A) gmail

>>11781757
okay this is epic