/lit/ - Literature

>>14068659
Scripture, not literature.

>>14068659
The Bible is fact and therefore not literature. Literature is like the Canteburry Tales.

>>14068659
so this is what a bible looks like
I like the font

>>14069100
its usually smaller only black font without the thing in the middle and with simpler more modern language
and it has ultra thin pages

>>14068659
Cambridge always has the most beautiful red letter. Its so dark.

>>14069178
Here is the text from my Cambridge Turquoise. This is my favorite Bible.

>jewish sandnigger scribble is the best the 'West' claims to produce
Oof
Major yikes from me dawg

>>14068659
its blasphemous to call Holy Scripture "literature."

>>14068659
Yup. Peak /lit/.

>>14069216
Beautiful anon.

Here's my tiny travel bible, an Oxford NRSV. It's a little bit smaller than a Loeb.

>>14069091
Christian theist here, you have to be delusional, utterly subjugated to a cultlike creepy church, or a huckster to make a statement like "the bible is fact".

>>14069431
>the sermons, the passion, the crucifixion, the resurrection
>not fact
oof.

>>14069258
*ahem*

Go back to /his/ where you belong, crypto-redditor

that isn't the west psued

OT is demiurgic propaganda but the NT is so fucking beautiful

>>14068659
the only fact here is that Christians can be more cringe than the fedora tippers

>>14068659
>Jesus did X
>Y appears
>"Z," said Jesus, and it was
Wow amazing

>>14069497

>the resurrection

There, that's where your greentext broke down. You have zero evidence for this

>>14070189
>There, that's where your greentext broke down. You have zero evidence for this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N93T-DppU6U

>>14070203
The Shroud is a well known hoax, no reputable historian takes it serious anymore

>>14070227
I'm not a theist or Christian but last I looked into it, I was really astonished by it. The fact of it having details on itself like x-ray elements (teeth, bone, etc) really perplexed me, since the first x-ray machine was only invented in 1900. That said, I wasn't aware of it being disproven. Is that definitive? No further studies being undertaken? I really thought it might have been a very special and miraculous document. Even though I'm not remotely Christian.

>>14070203
>muh medieval repair contaminated the 1988 study
The contamination theory is based on the idea that that there was a repair made during the period the shroud was found in Europe, that this repair was undocumented - and here is where it gets iffy - the repair was so expertly done as to be undetectable to the point of it being invisible. How was this done?

>>14069264
Nice. You really got the Christcucks with that one.

>>14068659
>n the Jewish "Old Testament," the book of divine justice, there are men, things, and speeches of such impressive style that the world of Greek and Indian literature has nothing to place beside them. We stand with fear and reverence before these tremendous remnants of what human beings once were and will in the process suffer melancholy thoughts about old Asia and its protruding peninsula of Europe, which, in marked contrast to Asia, would like to represent the "progress of man." Naturally, whoever is, in himself, only a weak, tame domestic animal and who knows only the needs of domestic animals (like our educated people nowadays, including the Christians of "educated" Christianity), among these ruins such a man finds nothing astonishing or even anything to be sad about - a taste for the Old Testament is a touchstone with respect to "great" and "small": - perhaps he finds the New Testament, that book of grace, still preferable to his heart (in it there is a good deal of the really tender, stifling smell of over-pious and small-souled people). To have glued together this New Testament, a sort of rococo of taste in all respects, with the Old Testament into a single book, as the "Bible," and "the essential book," that is perhaps the greatest act of daring and "sin against the spirit" which literary Europe has on its conscience.

>>14070246
It's disproven by the bible. iirc in one of the gospels it says Jesus' head was wrapped in a separate cloth, which was the practice of the time. So there wouldn't have been a single shroud around him in one piece. Also a part of it was carbon dated to the 1600s or something.
> No further studies being undertaken?
No, because the church doesn't want it to be disproven even more.