/lit/ - Literature

>>16719364
Probably not what you want to hear, but I advise to keep practicing your faith and read some spiritual books. For a lot of people, belief follows practice, and honestly temptation to doubt/despair may be a sign you're more advanced than you realize.

Suggestions for reading: Kierkegaard, Dostoyevsky, Newman, John of the Cross, Thomas a Kempis, Evagrius Ponticus

>>16719430
*Dostoevsky, inb4 my suggestions get dismissed for a typo

>>16719364
Go to therapy, a book won't help you here

>>16719364
>>16719430
You should avoid Victorian style spiritualism. I suggest diving into the patristics. If you prefer videos, check out Fr. Larry Young and Renaissance Man.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOx1Y
https://www..youtube.com/channel/UCH-nRYYdHLsYadhLinj59Egg92wI6kMGi5R0IVTjA

For now, start with these books:

Ecclesiastes

John of the Cross - Ascent of Mount Carmel

James Palmer - The bloody white baron

St. Athanasius - Life of St. Anthony of Egypt

St. Athanasius - On the Incarnation

Alphonsus Liguori - Préparation à la mort

The book of Sirach- Ben Sira

The Philokalia Volume 1

Therese of Lisieux - The Story of a Soul

St. Augustine - The Confessions of St. Augustine

>>16719450
I might but I don't want to be super biased, also I live in the middle of rural South America so it would be a giant punch in my wallet. My town has 15k people and I don't doubt I'm one of the few owners of a proper toilet over here. Closest city center is a 2 hour drive so you know.
>>16719430
Already read most of the works of those authors besides Kempis. Kierkegaard offers an argument as valid as Pascal's wager for me and that's seriously not enough. A leap of faith is basically everything I've been doing in the past 30 and so years of my existence.
>>16719467
Already read St. Augustine works. They helped a bit but didn't answer my biggest questions, and his avoidance of any confrontation with God ideals is a turn off. Might check the rest, as long as they don't follow much Augustine logic.

>>16719364
brother read the Bible
every extra-biblical source can only damage your faith, at this point, since you dont have a strong foundation
once one has a strong foundation in Christ, who can shake him?
if anything think of pascals wager
you have nothing to lose from believing in the bible, and everything to lose from not believing in the bible
life goes quick and eternal hellfire reaps more and more terror on my soul with every wisk'ed year
the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom
i am here for you brother if you have any questions on anything at all
o and on the depression bit
you defeat it by deepening it and then coming out the other side, all other forms are cope and will do nothing but prolong it, albeit dulled for a period
also listen to verdi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9HqRohOPuI

>>16719508
>town of 15k
>no running water
What?

Also, out of curiosity what are your
>biggest questions

>>16719516
>>16719467
>>16719430
Let the man have his crisis of faith you annoying bastards

>>16719534
would you have us condemn our brother? and incur the wrath of the Lord? it is not for him that I offer help, but rather for fear of H I M

>>16719508
Yeah I mentioned Kierkegaard less for his particular epistemology and more as a guide of keeping Christian praxis despite doubt.

I don't mean to pry, but are you following the moral guidelines of the Orthodox Church to the best of your abilities? Are you making regular use of Confession and talking about these issues with your priest?

>>16719534
Yeah he posted on a public forum about "feel[ing] completely awful," if he wanted to aestheticize this then he wouldn't have make a thread asking for recs.

>>16719543
Yes and yes

>>16719582
>if he wanted to aestheticize this then he wouldn't have make a thread asking for recs
He asked for recs to help cope with a godless world, not more christfag bullshit

>>16719591
uh oh someone got filtered by the Holy Spirit and is a l i t t l e b i t a n g r y

>>16719516
I've read the Bible as a whole countless times, and specific books much more than 10 or so. It didn't answer any doubt I had besides giving me insights in another important questions.
>if anything think of pascals wager
you have nothing to lose from believing in the bible, and everything to lose from not believing in the bible
I would need to apply this to every religion and denomination out there, I really don't understand how it makes it anything better. I might not really lose anything but I don't gain neither and live in a constant state of doubting, I want to believe in the christian God, I really do, but I just feel blind accepting it.

>>16719527
>town of 15k
>no running water
South America.
>Also, out of curiosity what are your
>biggest questions
People being sent to hell just because they believe in another deity based on their birthplace is the biggest one. It really doesn't follow any consistent logic with a good God. The fact that the christian God is mostly the same as the jewish one, that was originally in the Canaanite pantheon (or the Kenite hypothesis, point is it evolved from somewhere as most religions do) is another great question as well. I'm not sure for why evil exists, even after reading pretty much all Augustine and Aquino works and some of their students. That's just scratching the surface as well, there is much more I could go in lenght about.

>>16719582
>I don't mean to pry, but are you following the moral guidelines of the Orthodox Church to the best of your abilities? Are you making regular use of Confession and talking about these issues with your priest?

My city is 100% catholic so I always confess/go to the local catholic church. I've been following Orthodox teachings for years without knowing actually, and when I got head deep into it it just felt like another flavour of catholic. It's much more consistent than other denominations still, that's for sure, but doesn't change anything about my doubts.

>>16719591
I'm still open to talk about it but I would like more to focus in the recs about a godless world. I still appreciate the care tho.

>>16719634
ig your just not elect, kinda sucks bro have fun being hylic the rest of your life, probably stop reading any books because your not really capable of any higher understanding
some of us are meant to work at mcdonalds bro
guess u still got time to submit your application

>>16719534
noooo let him become a soulless hedonist shit

>>16719634
>but I would like more to focus in the recs about a godless world
Myth of Sisyphus
The Fall
On the Genealogy of Morals
Meditations

Take magic mushrooms

>>16719657
I have more soul in my left hand than all the hateful, performative christians on this board combined

>>16719671
the seat of the soul is the heart my guy this isnt even christian this is just basic spirituality
no one has any soul in their left hand
this is a barren vessel

>>16719364
Neither more books nor a therapist will help you. Take a pen, paper, and write what you think. Reason about it until you find some things you are sure enough of. Try to accept uncertainty and doubt, which, I know, is especially hard if you were religious before. With time, you'll accumulate enough beliefs and desires you're certain are yours and you want to hold on to that you'll be able to go forward without worry anymore.

>>16719364
You need to read Evola, anon. It's time.

>>16719634

>I would need to apply this to every religion and denomination out there

The issue is not all religions would say you're going to be punished for being Christian but not atheist. Moreover, one could still judge between different religions in addition to the wager (e.g. some Protestants obviously misinterpret the Bible, Aquinas' argument against polytheism can hold even if you don't accept his argument for theism, etc.)

>it evolved from somewhere as most religions do
If theistic evolution is coherent for biology (the official Catholic and Orthodox position), it can also logically hold true for cultural evolution. I advise reading about accomodationism; even though he's Jewish Maimonides has the best account of this.

I still think your best bet is to push through this with praxis, but I can actually understand why you'd no longer be interested in approaching this from an apologetics/traditional theology angle. Look into Radical Orthodoxy, but if you really want atheistic accounts of ethics the secular accounts of virtue ethics (e.g. Foot) would probably be most palatable to you and still get at what I'm saying.

>>16719671
sure bro ;)

>>16719681
You know what I mean you pedant

>>16719691
A good therapist will let someone work their shit out, and will interject very little.

>>16719695
>it can also logically hold true for cultural evolution
But the problem there is that the Yahweh of the Canaanites is so far removed from the Christian god that it makes the whole thing look absurd. Some Christians still call him "the Lord of Hosts," but that name derives from his time as a Canaanite war god.

>>16719731
u realize that the canaanites didnt worship yahweh?
and btw the God of the OT is very much so consistent with the God of the NT

>>16719731
>But the problem there is that the Yahweh of the Canaanites is so far removed from the Christian god that it makes the whole thing look absurd. Some Christians still call him "the Lord of Hosts," but that name derives from his time as a Canaanite war god.

Right, the accommodationist explanation is that God revealed Himself in a way that was intellegible in the original context in which the Hebrews dwelled, and thus as a war god resembling those of surrounding areas.

Origen and Maimonides handled this centuries before the Kenite hypothesis was even considered.

>>16719661
Thanks, Meditations helped a lot.
>>16719651
Not sure about what you are talking about. Is this gnosticism?
>>16719657
Even without a God I wouldn't become an hedonist. Almost all teachings of the Bible that come to morals are right logically, at least in the new teastment, and those I will take for life.
>>16719691
I keep a journal where I note my thoughts and try to organizate things. It reads like The Book of Disquiet for the most part, besides the strong religious parts. I have a logic of my own but found that having outer sources greatly improve my thoughts, in the way I feel I'm past certain argument or logic.
>is especially hard if you were religious before
That's kind of a misconception, I've always doubted it in a way or another but kept it rather supressed. I'm firm to the fact I'm more rational than several life long atheists out there. I understand where it comes from still.

>>16719695
Most of them do. Islam, several christian denominations, Hindus, Buddhists, old religions, african ones and so on. All of them have their particular type of hell if you don't follow their specific teachings, even if it isn't like the christian one. When you account old and minor religions, it just gets way worse as well.
>If theistic evolution is coherent for biology (the official Catholic and Orthodox position), it can also logically hold true for cultural evolution. I advise reading about accomodationism; even though he's Jewish Maimonides has the best account of this.
When you take that in account, religious teachings, stories, myths and appearances become so liquid and uncertain that I'm not even sure it would be any beneficial to keep believing in them. If a God was 100% true, why the fuck would his teachings and entire belief structure change along the years? His essence would surely be lost after a couple hundreds of years, and that would make 80% of religions worldwide have the same God and validity which doesn't make sense when accounting their pratical beliefs.

>>16719778
You are still accounting that the Hebrews got the "right" interpretations. The other interpretations are just as valid, and when accounting this to every religion out there it just becomes absurd as well. That's just assuming firstly that christianity is right THEN making the argument, which invalidates the whole thing.

>>16719364
Stop trying to find your faith in books, or here. Ask your priesta questions, they know better than us.

>>16719819
the elect is not gnostic, the hylic is, but it corresponds well
gnosticism is still a sect of christianity, which means it has some things correct
also just lieave this place too

>>16719827
Hol up, no. What exactly is it that you're struggling woth? I might be able to give you some pointers.

>>16719827
I live in a small city in South America. My priest is a really great guy and one of my best friends. I talk to him about it in a constant basis, but he isn't that well read and only tells me to believe without doubting, which I did for decades. It doesn't help much, besides he being the most good person I met my entire life.

>>16719861
Well just read the thread. I'm mostly looking towards recommendations of books about a godless world, the thread is present with some of my biggest questions but I have many more.

>>16719819
The idea of there being a predetermined "elect" who get into heaven is a Calvinist doctrine. Very influential in America.

>>16719819
Most theologically sophisticated Hindus don't think Christians go to hell but w/e

None of the accommodationist argument necessitates the claim that the original "Hebrews got the "right" interpretations," the exact point is that the interpretations changed and deepened over time.

And yes it entails a limited form of pluralism (which also elides your concerns about hell somewhat -- see how all this comes together?) but accommodationist/evolutionist theologians are consistently able to explain and justify why some religious claims are literal and others are not.

I'll reiterate that Origen and Maimonides are extremely intelligent expositors of these ideas who anticipated most critical Biblical scholarship before it even happened.

>>16719886
>Origen
dis nigga cut his nuts off

>>16719917
He probably didn't and even if he did it doesn't discredit his hermeneutics; he literally gives the opposite interpretation of that verse in his commentary on Matthew.

>>16719364
Twilight of the Idols
It will teach you how to trust natural virtue and rid you of unnatural "morality"

>>16719886
If you don't assume hebrews got it right, then it's just another form of pluralism. I'm not sure what's your point then.

>but accommodationist/evolutionist theologians are consistently able to explain and justify why some religious claims are literal and others are not.

Like what and how? Honestly that just looks like pluralism to me, please correct me if I'm wrong.

>>16719926
Why should I trust a man who was voluntarily herme-neutered

>>16719364
meditate and dont worry about christianity so much. every religion has its flaws.

>>16719956
I think we might be talking past each other; it's a limited form of pluralism in that it recognizes a degree of truth to many claims and a degree of diversity within the truth, but not absolute equality between all religious truth claims.

I'll reiterate that your best bet is to consult both authors, in part precisely because they give somewhat different answers, but to give a Christian answer based on Origen: the ministry and resurrection of Christ must have happened because it is the bedrock on which knowledge of God as presented in the NT, which lets us interpret history, is founded. Now, this is not an artibtrary point, because one could tie into it an argument for the historicity of Jesus or the resurrection. But by clarifying some passages in light of others, you can find a cohesive meaning and articulate why some things need to have happened for Christianity to be true and some do not.

>>16719987
This was good, I'll grant that.

>>16720013
>the ministry and resurrection of Christ must have happened because it is the bedrock on which knowledge of God as presented in the NT, which lets us interpret history, is founded

By that logic, most miracles of other religions are also true, mainly those that have no connection at all with christianity. I think Jesus existed with no shadow of doubt.

>But by clarifying some passages in light of others, you can find a cohesive meaning and articulate why some things need to have happened for Christianity to be true and some do not.

This already supposes Christianity is right to an extent and rather defeats the purpose. I could go and make the same arguments for Buddhists or Hindus about their miracles, it really doesn't help much.

>>16719364
There are so many brilliant theologians out there and yet for me it's Chesterton who always seems to restore my faith.

>>16720058
Right, I think I explained this poorly. I'm not saying this method is an absolute proof of Christianity; I'm saying it provides a theological explanation for empirical/scriptural data about things like the possible Canaanite origins of the Jewish God or apparent differences between God in the OT and NT.

Put differently, things like the Kenite hypothesis, while interesting, fail as arguments against Christianity because they assume what they try to prove: a totally natural explanation for the data. Christians are equally able to explain the data within their theological views, so the data don't have any logical relationship with Christian truth claims.

You could in principle make parallel arguments for other religions (I haven't seen it done within those traditions but it may have been), but I as a Christian wouldn't argue against Hinduism or Buddhism because they came form the PIE religion or anything like that.

>>16720099
But you also assume what you try to prove, which is the truth of Christian scripture

>>16720116
Correct; my point is the Kenite hypothesis in and of itself neither proves nor disproves Christianity, because the data are never interpreted independently of a theological framework.

I would employ different arguments for the truth of Christianity -- such as arguments for the historicity of the resurrection -- but they are external to the hermeneutic I am offering here.

>>16720143
>such as arguments for the historicity of the resurrection
Now this I would love to see

>>16720152
Not sure if you're OP but I recommend Licona, WLC, NT Wright and JP Holding as starting points for this; imageboards really aren't the place to dig into the nitty-gritty of this argument.

>>16720160
>read all these acronyms
Just give me a tl;dr before I waste my time with this shit

>>16719364
>Mainly to base my morality
There literally is no such thing as objective truth or morality outside of a the christian God. Good fucking luck, you'll need it.

Read Augustine. Christian or not it will be valuable. Plato too.

>>16719364
I will visit my parents-in-law for now so I won't reply for a while, I will still read the replies once I get back.

Also >>16720143 thanks, I will look into it even after my skepticism about the fact.

>>16719634
>People being sent to hell just because they believe in another deity based on their birthplace
>why evil exists
You sqy you've read all those books, but have you tried meditating on them?
Would recommend you give a read to the encyclical Lumen Gentium and meditate on Natural Law. What I understand of it is that god knows what is good for us because He made us and knows what works for our benefit. These would be then distinguishable in our human nature, hence why all religions teach some element of Truth. This last thing would be like a preparation for hearing the Word of God.
Read and don't ask here, ask your priest.
On the other question, this guy kinda got it.
>>16718578
What I've come to understand as "evil" without even finishing the book of Job.

Have you read A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right?

"The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

"Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo."

>>16720172
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl4nNiVt2n0
N.T. Wright is a biblical theologian. I'm a different anon but I highly recommend listening to what he has to say, since american "christianity" tends to be missing a lot of the biblical christian beliefs of early christianity. Also definitely read the writings of the early church fathers.

You can search what the other acronyms are about, Google exists for this purpose pretty much.

>>16719364
Leave out the idolatry. Convert to Judaism. Talk with a rabbi. Or at least just read the Hebrew Bible to inform and improve your life.

>>16719364
Doubt is fine if you come to the rational conclusion that religion is false you should abandon it, if you can’t justify your faith through reason it isn’t worth anything. Basically read apologetics

>>16720442
Why?
>>16720490
Most christian apologetics I read had several argumentative flaws.

>>16721014
>>16720255
>>16719861
I completeley forgot to add. This should be on your next confession, since you're doubting the goodness of God. Don't convert until after you've done it.

>>16719364
seraphim rose, gregory of nyssa, and dostoe. dont read augustine - its terrible. read nyssa.

>>16719430
>>16719364
Just finished Dostoyevsky's Demons and it's getting me closer and closer to finding my faith, which I lost 13 years ago.

>>16721188
Read my OP, I'm quite far from changing my faith still
>>16721196
Might read those, thanks. I agree, I'm not sure why Augustine is shilled so much here. I think he has some good points but nothing you can't get by yourself, and his denotions of time are ridiculous in my opinion.

>>16721208
I've read almost all of Dosto works and it didn't got me closer at all, I'm not sure why everyone is recommending him so much. They are excellent romances, but don't make any convincing arguments for christianity besides moral reflections.