/lit/ - Literature

Yup, nothing could be more redpilled than worshipping a 2000 year old jewish gangster whose followers wrote a sequel to the jewish power fantasy novel to keep the population sedated and happy.

>>14079504
if you know about the IS yes

>>14079554
What's this IS you speak of anon

>>14079569
Yo momma IS gay

>>14079504
Christianity is the ultimate diagnosis.

>>14079538
Brainlet take regardless of your belief.

>>14079538
that sounds kinda cool though

>>14079579
That was sick

>>14079595
I can get behind this statement. Anything that has that much power to completely change a person's outlook on life has got to be based

>>14079504
What /pol/ has deemed "red pill" is in fact the Matrix. So yes, it very very blue pilled.

>>14079538
I will never understand why people use the anti-semitic tropes created by Christianity to critique it in return. You are still acting within a Christian mindset. Before Christianity began to call them the synagogue of satan no one cared about the Jews.

>>14079623
>Drugs are based, mmkay?

>>14079624
As if some insect like you would know what the real redpill is.

>>14079538

Actually, that's kinda hot.

Christianity is the religion that will end religions. today's atheism and secularisation would not have sprouted this way in a pagan world. not saying this as a good thing or a bad thing, just as a fact

>>14079639
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH9tzku9EH8
In a forest pitch-dark
Glowed the tiniest spark
It burst into a flame
Like me, like me

My name Isobel
Married to myself
My love; Isobel
Living by herself

In a heart full of dust
Lives a creature called lust
It surprises and scares
Like me, like me

My name Isobel
Married to myself
My love; Isobel
Living by ourself

When she does it, she means to
Ƹ̵̡MothƷ delivers her message
Unexplained on your collar
Scrawling in silence, a simple excuse

Na na na, na na. Na na na, na na. Na na na, na na. Na na na, na na

In a tower of steel
Nature forges a deal
To raise wonderful hell
Like me, like me

My name Isobel
Married to myself
My love Isobel
Living by herself

When she does it, she means to
Moth delivers her message
Unexplained on your collar
Scrawling in silence, the simple excuse

Na na na, na na. Na na na, na na
Na na na, na na. Na na na, na na
Na na na, na na. Na na na, na na
Na na na, na na. Na na na, na na
Na na na, na na. Na na na, na na
Na na na, na na. Na na na, na na

>>14079677
>atheism and secularisation would not have sprouted this way in a pagan world
It actually was. Secularism develops in educated circles, and educated circles only happen during prosperity. This is why most religions prefer the *flocks* poor and stupid, and why zealotry develops in impoverished places.

>>14079624
Oh god pls leave

>>14079504
No, agnosticism is the ultimate redpill because you can’t know anything for sure except your own thoughts
Although from a less faggy perspective, pantheism is the ultimate red pill

>>14079713
not the kind of secularism we have today. there have been critics of religion in non-christian contexts and examples of secularism in a political sense (albeit not as explicit and apparently fundamental as we see it today) but it was always a sense of keeping the earthly things to earth, not today's egocentric outright rejection of the divine. the current Zeitgeist revolves around capitalist atomised selfishness, which in turn derives from the enlightenment and its scientific emancipation of man, which I would argue would never have been conceived this way if it weren't for Christianity's focus on the human and on the individual nature of the soul and so on. this is also the reason why Christianity attracts the "poor" and the "uneducated" in contexts where community isn't enough (or is based on these values), because it speaks to the tragic lives of abandoned individuals that can hope in individual salvation. contemporary scientism and liberalism and capitalism do the same, in a more machinelike and disenchanted way. doing to Christianity what it had done to paganism, using Christianity's tools.
i would even argue that secularisation was one of Christianity's main ways of spreading..

>>14079504
Christianity is the ultimate bluepill because no matter how redpilled you are, you can always take it and undo everything.

>>14079856
What blithering, generalizing, man-splaing bullshit

>>14079504
No, not really. Observe as I disprove the Christian God:

1. God is sovereign. [Premise]
2. God is ethically correct. [Premise]
3. God is immutable. [Premise]
4. God determines what is ethically correct. [From 1]
5. God is ethically correct prior to his decision about what is ethically correct. [From 2, 3, and 4]
6. God, with the attributes mentioned in steps 1, 2, and 3, doesn't exist. [From 5]

Note: "Prior" in step 5 can be either in the order of time or of explanation, in the sense of being a partial determiner of.

Biblical sources for each premise can be found here: https://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-study/topical-studies/15-amazing-attributes-of-god-what-they-mean-and-why-they-matter.html

>>14079900
sorry ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>14079900
When will it end butterfly. Why do you keep doing this.I truly don't understand.

>>14079504
>three gods
no

>>14079856
Good post. The tides are turning

>>14079900
I want to get back to the right path without genocide but fucking tranny philosophers hoping for a perverse transexual apotheosis of man are making it real hard

>>14079538
I kinda feel bad for americans being fed masonic propaganda but two centuries later than europe. literally reads like babbys first disinfo. one good thing about being french is that our nation was one of the first to be perverted so we get the cool factor.

>>14079596
The truth is dumb sometimes, get over it.

>>14079677
the greeks were already atheists, only tards actually believed in the gods on olympus

>>14080039
Highly debatable. The notion of belief itself was different so it doesn't really make sense to speak of religious faith in Greek religion as you would in modern western religion

>>14080005
>The tides are turning
Yes, poverty is spreading. We know.
Fucking pony-fags

>>14080047
just saying that the secularisation we see today could’ve easily been acomplished if we had stayed pagan

>>14080039
Atheism as it exists now is a reaction against Christianity and cannot be compared to anything pre-Christian.
Even if they didn't actually believe in the gods, they weren't atheists in any sense relating to the modern meaning of the word.

>>14079504
>Is Christianity the ultimate redpill?
More than you could ever realise.

>All the human beings through the story, and Job especially, have been asking questions of God. A more trivial poet would have made God enter in some sense or other in order to answer the questions. By a touch truly to be called inspired, when God enters, it is to ask a number of questions on His own account. In this drama of skepticism God Himself takes up the role of skeptic. He does what all the great voices defending religion have always done. He does, for instance, what Socrates did. He turns rationalism against itself. He seems to say that if it comes to asking questions, He can ask some question which will fling down and flatten out all conceivable human questioners. The poet by an exquisite intuition has made God ironically accept a kind of controversial equality with His accusers.
>This is the first great fact to notice about the speech of God, which is the culmination of the inquiry. It represents all human skeptics routed by a higher skepticism. It is this method, used sometimes by supreme and sometimes by mediocre minds, that has ever since been the logical weapon of the true mystic. Socrates, as I have said, used it when he showed that if you only allowed him enough sophistry he could destroy all sophists.
>It is the root and reason of the fact that men who have religious faith have also philosophic doubt. These are the small streams of the delta; the book of Job is the first great cataract that creates the river. In dealing with the arrogant asserter of doubt, it is not the right method to tell him to stop doubting. It is rather the right method to tell him to go on doubting , to doubt a little more, to doubt every day newer and wilder things in the universe, until at last, by some strange enlightenment, he may begin to doubt himself.
>Job puts forward a note of interrogation; God answers with a note of exclamation. Instead of proving to Job that it is an explicable world, He insists that it is a much stranger world than Job ever thought it was. Lastly, the poet has achieved in this speech, with that unconscious artistic accuracy found in so many of the simpler epics, another and much more delicate thing. Without once relaxing the rigid impenetrability of Jehovah in His deliberate declaration, he has contrived to let fall here and there in the metaphors, in the parenthetical imagery, sudden and splendid suggestions that the secret of God is a bright and not a sad one – semi-accidental suggestions, like light seen for an instant through the crack of a closed door.

>>14079900
DAY OF THE NET
AY OF THE NET
Y OF THE NET
OF THE NET
DAY

>>14080039
Plato believed in transcendence, Aristotle believed in an unmoved-mover which permeated all space and time manifesting reality, the Pythagoreans deified a transcendental mathematics, even the Epicureans, who believed the gods didn't interact with reality, believed in a deistic pantheon. Read a book and shut your mouth

>>14080058
The misery of poverty- both economic and moral- is the gestational form of a coming movement which will fundamentally change our world view. If you think tranny-futurism is coming, you'll be in for a shock as angry mobs drag you out of your home and crucify you. I hope it doesn't come to that and that the masses don't degenerate into animal brutality, but if history is any indicator... good luck

>>14079504
I read that Christianity is both brainlet tier and Multi-verse brain tier. The depth of Christianity is unlike anything else in this world, so it pretty much depends on how far you're willing to dig into the rabbit hole

>>14079813
>pantheism
Pantheism is brainlet-stoner-newage tier. The universe cannot be God, because that would imply that the universe existed prior to creating itself

>>14080143
But why the picture of yourself?

>>14080097
Pony-fag

>>14080143
Not all religions believe the universe is created. Plenty of religions believe that the universe is eternal

I don't believe that but I think your reasoning is coming from a modern perspective that doesn't fully understand the term

>>14080223
>I think your reasoning is coming from a modern perspective that doesn't fully understand the term
My reasoning comes from the Bible, that's supported by modern science. The idea that everything had a beginning.

>>14080067
define atheist, because I'm pretty sure "not believing in a god or gods" makes a person an atheist regardless of the time period

>>14080290
That's what the word means literally, but I'm saying in the last 100 or so years it has taken on specific connotations that narrow and hone in the scope of the word. A self-identified atheist from 2019 has zero shared metaphysical perspective with someone from the pre-modern world who may be an "atheist" under the basic superficial meaning of the word.

>>14079504
Christianity is the ultimate degeneracy based on the ultimate blue pill: Judaism.

https://archive.org/details/FriedrichNietzscheTheWillToPower/page/n131

Read from page 97 onward. You're only a Christian today because either:

a) you haven't read Nietzsche yet, or
b) you're too stupid for Nietzsche

>>14080206
words of a defeated sheman

>>14080350
tips fedoa*

>>14079900
>man-splaing

>>14080350
Christianity is the opposite of judaism retard. Why do you think jews hate jesus so much?

>>14080414

>>14080432
Christians have nothing to do with Jesus. They don't practice anything Jesus wanted people to practice. Christians practice what the church wishes them to practice, what Paul's text wishes them to practice, which was simply the symbolism of Judaism mystified for a new audience. Jesus didn't even believe in an afterlife.

>>14080432
Jews don't give two shits about Christianity, it's the traditionalism they're after, the last roadblock to globalism. Christ cucks just happened to make a good proxy-target.

>>14080456
>Jesus didn't even believe in an afterlife.
Care to provide any evidence or are you going to continue talking out of your ass

>>14081419
Luke 17:21 contradicts the concept.

>>14079504

Having cuckold fetish isn't "redpilled".

>>14081494
>Yer brain existed before your brain actually existed
He was doing okay till he went full Ritardo Montalban

>>14081491
That doesn't contradict.
Saying the Kingdom of God is within you (often translated as "in your midst" as well, to rid it of any misinterpretation) just means that you have the power of God's Kingdom within you. Heaven is the perfection of that power and the full realization of it.

>>14081542
You don't understand because you haven't thought about it long enough.

First of all, we know that Jesus revolted against the priesthood establishment during his time, which already had commandments, sin, and guilt, so why would yet another establishment today founded on these elements be something that he would have wanted?

Second of all, the passage says that the kingdom of God is not just within you, but that it isn't a place you can point to. If it's not a location, this "within you" bit can only mean one thing: it's a condition of the heart.

Jesus the man was crucified. Why? Because he revolted against the priesthood. How? By offering an ideology that undermined theirs. You would have people believe that Jesus was just reiterating on what the priesthood taught, but that wasn't the case. Paul the Jew conned you.

>>14079691
>My name Isobel
>Married to myself
>My love Isobel
>Living by herself

Sounds like a future of being abused in Nursing Homes for childless, family-less Isobel...

>>14081562
WHAT! They're black?! But how can this be.. Black women are known for their gentleness and social intelligence. They would never do something like this.

>>14081509
we don't need that cuck in our church, he is a fake pope. a real man of God is in pic related.

>>14079504
>letting contrarianism on 4chan trick you into adhering to a supernatural belief system that defies science and empiricism at every turn
Absolute retardation.

>>14079813
Pure agnosticism is a copout. While it's true that we can't know for sure that God doesn't exist (or that anyone beyond our own thoughts is real), it's generally improbable that God exists, and for that reason, I'm often tempted to call myself an agnostic atheist, or more wordily, a technical agnostic and a practical atheist.

>>14080122
>The depth of Christianity is unlike anything else in the world.
Not really. You only have that impression because you're so immersed in Western culture. It's akin to the way we think of there being so much depth to European history - while ignoring an equally rich millenium-spanning history in the far East.

>>14080143
Pantheism is just atheism for atheists who are too cowardly to admit that there's nothing out there.

>>14080432
Christianity is an evolution and extension of Judaism, you absolute mouth-breathing retard. Jump off a fucking cliff.

>>14081573
cope

>>14081588
Good argument.

>>14081559
Yes, heaven isn't a place you can point to either. It is beyond the sensible order. That once again doesn't contradict. You seem to think the the orthodox believe Heaven to be a happy place in the clouds or something, that is not the case. Heaven is the state in which the being is totally united with God. The Kingdom of Heaven is inside of us since we have part of that unification inside of us, ready to be cultivated.


Jesus did not revolt against the Priesthood as an idea, only the Pharisees who had corrupted it. He explicitly said that he did not come to cast away the law. He came to fulfill it and reform it to greater glory. Your anachronistic Nietzschean lens is completely foreign to traditional understandings.

>>14081573
>I'm often tempted to call myself an agnostic atheist, or more wordily, a technical agnostic and a practical atheist.
Holy autism...

>>14081603
>The Kingdom of Heaven is inside of us since we have part of that unification inside of us, ready to be cultivated.
You can't read, can you? The passage says the kingdom of heaven is inside us and around us. That means it's already here. It's not "ready to be cultivated" — it's attainable, here on earth, right now. It's a mindset. It has nothing to do with your gibberish.

>>14081614
Better to be autistic than retarded.

>>14081565
They were vibrantly enriching those old boomers, and also Muh Reparations!

>>14081619
Sure, everyone can read that phrase, but very few fully recognize the presence of God at all times in all things. Maybe you are a Saintly man and are always immersed in God, but I believe that to be something that is to be worked towards recognizing fully.

>>14081593
yeah i basically ended you

>>14081630
You're missing my point. Sentiments like those don't flow with the rest of the Judaic hogwash in the bible, most of which is pulled from the Old Testament, which supports the cloth. We have no evidence that Jesus "did not revolt against the Priesthood as an idea." None. All we know is that he was crucified by the Roman government for being subversive. "The law" that he wanted to preserve, for all we know, had absolutely nothing to do with the church.

You're a mindless sheep who refuses to read the works of philosophers who have already taken the Christian ideology to its logical extremes and dismantled it from its core. You don't read but you act like you know what you're talking about. Sickening.

>>14081637
If you are interpreting Jesus based only on historical, material evidence, then why do you even quote scripture, the thing from which I have shown him not have revolted against the priesthood. You have contradicted yourself. Our discussion was on interpretation of scripture, until you switched now to something totally different.

It is very odd how angry you become and your constant use of Jewish epithets in every reply.
>You're a mindless sheep who refuses to read the works of philosophers
Why the projection? I have read many anti-Christian authors and my personal religious practices have not even been brought into the discussion.

>>14081666
I quote scripture because an underlying psychology can be read from any text, all of which is written by humans, and the interpretation of that passage in particular that appears to logically triumph to me is one that has a psychology behind it that contradicts other passages.

>I have read many anti-Christian authors and my personal religious practices have not even been brought into the discussion.
No, you haven't, or the ones you read were rubbish. The entire thing-in-itself is dead after Nietzsche; there's no believing in that lie after him, unless you didn't read or understood him. The entire metaphysics and morality from Christianity is consequently dead after him. He refuted the foundation of the entire Semitic system and also showed an extremely concise analysis of the history of Jews and Christians and how they are linked that can't be ignored if one wants to be intellectually honest at all in this day and age. It takes years of thinking about his works to understand this, as many years as reading the bible. If you've read the bible more than you've read Nietzsche I can guarantee you that you haven't reached a full understanding of him yet and are still behind in terms of how far philosophy has ventured.

>>14081691
>I quote scripture because an underlying psychology can be read from any text,
You were trying to show an explicit doctrinal contradiction, not a psychological or mental one. You are retroactively switching your stated position.

>The entire metaphysics and morality from Christianity is consequently dead after him. He refuted the foundation of the entire Semitic system
I am just going to assume you are baiting at this point. Nietzsche is not infallible and if you are going to present him as such, you are going to need to back him up with more than simply an argument to authority. You can't just say he was right, end of story. Plenty of people have disagreed with him. You haughtiness and projections are tiring. How ironic that you consider others to be close minded when you repeatedly do nothing but throw out ad hominem arguments in every post.

>>14081735
>You are retroactively switching your stated position.
Wrong. You're just slow to understand me.

>You can't just say he was right, end of story. Plenty of people have disagreed with him.
I've yet to find a good argument against him. Do you know what it entails to demonstrate that he was right? It can't be done in a single thread. He nonetheless tore Christians a new one in The Antichrist and his Will to Power notes and they refuse to thoroughly read those works and regularly call ad homimen against him as a result (something which I didn't do to you, by the way; my argument starts with reason and ends in asserting that you haven't read him, while people start with ad hominem against Nietzsche and never arrive at reason).

>>14081752
>Wrong. You're just slow to understand me.
Once again, ad hominem and no argument. You mentioned nothing of psychology in your posts. But ok, you are infallible apparently.

>It can't be done in a single thread.
Then why even bring him up as an argument. An argument you can't use is not an argument at all. The burden of proof is on you if you to show why he is disproved it. Once again, you can't just say he "tore Christians apart" and then proceed to say that you can't show it in this thread.

>>14079504
Yes.

Romans 5:8 kjv
>But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

>>14081766
That's not ad hominem, you twit. I'm reaching my conclusion because your argument is unreasonable. Learn what ad hominem is before trying to use it.

>Then why even bring him up as an argument.
Because he has all the arguments you need. Burden of proof has been settled by him already, and I even linked to where. Although, I did offer an interpretation of that passage here which you failed to refute, but that's because you're too busy trying to tell me I'm wrong rather than thinking things through.

Waiting with a bated breath for 4chan to get through it's spiritual fancy phase so we can all stop pretending to like christianity and talk like adults again.

>>14081781
You are trying to using an baseless insult as an argument. Yes, that was ad hominem unfortunately.

> failed to refute
I guess you didn't read my post then.
> that's because you're too busy trying to tell me I'm wrong
That would be what refuting is. You once again contradicted yourself and your words are becoming inarticulate.

>Because he has all the arguments you need.
I could just as easily say the same thing for Christ and say that the reasons why are beyond this thread. That defeats the entire purpose of a debate if you are just going to say that which is important can't be debated. There are times for that, but certainly not here when you are trying to discredit others.

>>14081797
Not ad hominem, retard.

>I guess you didn't read my post then.
You dropped trying to refute me and went on about how most don't live according to the principle. Nothing was refuted. But look, what you need to do to refute my stance is demonstrate that yours is reasonable, and you haven't done that yet.

>I could just as easily say the same thing for Christ
Not really considering we don't actually have any writings by him.

>>14081817
> ad hominem adj.
>Attacking a person's character or motivations rather than a position or argument.
Literally the definition. You have used insults as arguments in nearly every post lol.

>Not really considering we don't actually have any writings by him.
That's not the point of the argument. The argument is that you can't say someone as a source in a debate but then say that they can't be explained when you are called out.

>what you need to do to refute my stance
You don't even have a stance. You are presenting a thinker while simultaneously not being able to explain him.

>>14081837
>You have used insults as arguments in nearly every post lol.
Point to two instances.

>The argument is that you can't say someone as a source in a debate but then say that they can't be explained when you are called out.
Nietzsche can be explained but it takes too much time for a single thread. I don't know what the fuck you don't get about this. You want to learn something? Read what I linked to, which will take days, and then think on it for days. Actually put in the effort if you care about the truth at all.

>>14081858
>You're a mindless sheep who refuses to read the works of philosophers
>You're just slow to understand me.

Attacks upon character that try to discredit me instead of the argument. Pretty obvious.

>I don't know what the fuck you don't get about this.
I don't know what you don't get. We were debating, not recommending reading material. Appeals to authority in the history of philosophy are not an argument.
>Actually put in the effort if you care about the truth at all.
Same to you my friend :)

>>14081875
First one is fair, but the second one was not ad hominem. You literally misinterpreted me. I never switched my argument around once nor was slowness even an insult there.

>We were debating, not recommending reading material.
Yeah, because OP seems interested in debating. At least I brought literature into the /lit/ thread.

>Appeals to authority in the history of philosophy are not an argument.
Good thing no such appeals were made.

>>14081887
>Good thing no such appeals were made.
You said Nietzsche disproved Christianity and then failed to say anything else. How many times do I have to say this. That is a textbook appeal to authority if you don't say anything more in a debate, what we were engaged in.

>>14081896
He did though and I linked to where you can read some of that process. Are you saying if I copypasted all that text here you would shut up about this inane point of yours?

>>14081901
Posting titles of books is once again, not an argument. I could do the same thing with the Summa. That's not an argument unless I argue the points from it. This is very bizarre to me that you find this to be a difficult concept to understand

No, I'm afraid that monotheism in all its forms is wholly inadequate to express the divine nature of the whole of reality.

>>14080017
>I kinda feel bad for americans being fed masonic propaganda but two centuries later than europe.
explain