/lit/ - Literature

>christfags larping on a website where you're two clicks away from cp and loli pron

Based and Carl Schmitt-pilled.

>>17920314
never heard of him

>>17920331
In his book the "Concept of the Political", he specifically speaks about how when Christ talks about loving your enemies, he is using the Greek word "hostis" and not the word "polemios", the latter of which is the word the Ancient Greeks used for enemies they went to war with.

The word "hostis" on the other hand, doesn't contain the animus required to go to war and kill someone, it is simply disagreement, or opposition, it is not an Enemy with a capital E that you must kill in order to survive.

This is how Christianity historically could justify its crusades and it's self-perceived defense of Europe against Muslim invasions to itself.

>>17920307
So how is that different from attending a mass?

>>17920307
Show me where the cp is on 4chan so I can go and report them anon

>>17920382
ayy lmao

>>17920362
Interesting. Now that you say this I think I actually saw that book mentioned before and looked it up, and I think I also saw an anon talk about those words. However I'm not sure that distinction is necessarily the one I was talking about in the OP but interesting nonetheless.

Luke 6:27 uses εχθρος which means "hated, odious, hostile, hateful, etc. The context is telling us to love our εχθρους or enemies which clearly isn't just the people we're at war with.

>>17920293
>t. unable to love his enemies, resorting to a redefinition that makes it easier for him
No one said following the path of Christ was easy.

>>17920362
In which case, rivals or dislikables or some other word would be a better translation, no?
The more I learn about Biblical scholarship, the more it feels like there has been a deliberate attempt to obfuscate the meaning. Is Carl Schmitt the best to read on this or will I have to learn Greek?

>>17920538
post software please

>>17920561
Everyone who is interested in politics should read Carl Schmitt in general, but he's not really a theologian as far as I know, some religious questions are just undoubtedly political.

>>17920538
don't think you got my point, Christians never do

>>17920546
ad hominem, typical christian retardation

>>17920693
I'm not a Christian but explain it all the same. What does Luke 6:27 mean?

>>17920607
This is it

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=bible.lexicon&hl=en_US&gl=US

>>17920293
>Clearly these two things aren't the same fucking thing.

Except your explanation isn't clear at all, and you fail to convince.

There's no contradiction. Those can be the same enemies, Jesus can count them as enemies of him, but that doesn't mean that he hates them.

>>17920976
Fucking idiot, I didn't say it was a contradiction.

>christians explaining how ‘love your enemies’, ‘don’t resist evil’ and ‘turn the other cheek’ means killing anyone who disagrees with you and wars of aggression

>>17920915
Fuck off with your Luke 6:27, I was talking about the OP, you didn't get it.
>which clearly isn't just the people we're at war with.
The distinction isn't between person A and person B, if you understood what I said you'd understand the distinction is a different one and person A can be either of the two meanings I mentioned, both at once or neither.

>>17921407
yeah, I usually sum this up in this statement:
>forgive, don't seek justice, except when it's just
But Christians are too stupid to see logical fallacies in their thinking, and I don't mean just this thing, I mean all their thinking.

>>17920940
It's clear as day to anyone with IQ>60, you're just dumb as fuck. I've explained it in 100 different ways, Christians are simply too retarded to ever get it.

>>17921393
Then what's the matter you ape?

>>17921407
literally, none is justifying those two things

>>17921414
Why don't you just explain the distinction you're making instead of acting like such a weird cunt. What is the meaning of εχθρος that people are misunderstanding?

>>17921561
>εχθρος
Fuck off with your own shit. You're the one that brought that in, not me. I already explained clearly as fuck, not my problem you have shit for brains.

>>17921594
It's a word commonly translated as enemy. What words are you talking about?

>>17921549
It is a contradiction too you fucking idiot.
>>17921432
>forgive, don't seek justice, except when it's just
https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/303331037/
https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/305321019/

>>17921621
fuck off low IQ shit

>>17921673
I think it's clear you don't know anything. You can't even tell me what words you're talking about.

>>17921666
>Fucking idiot, I didn't say it was a contradiction.
>It is a contradiction too you fucking idiot.

>>17920293
I agree and disagree. I agree that context matters in understanding the meanings of words. That's just common sense, really. But you can dispense with this entire theory:
>It's clear to me that the word "enemy" used to be two separate words, which were later merged into one and the old meanings erased from human consciousness, memory holed. This, and other such manipulation of language, explains a lot of the retardation we see exhibited in Christians today.
First, you haven't specified in which language this supposed merging took place. Was it Koine Greek? Classical Hebrew? Aramaic? All of them? Every language on Earth? And you seem to suggest that some sort of vast conspiracy has taken place in subtly erasing the nuance of this word when you use terms like "memory holed" and "manipulation of language." Either way, it's unnecessary. Jesus' use of the word "enemy" can mean something different than the psalmist's without resorting to a crackpot etymology. I think you can easily explain it as a difference in authorial intent. Jesus pretty clearly meant "enemy" and "hatred" in the sense of an egoistic desire to see one's personal foes suffer, while the psalmist pretty clearly meant "enemy" and "hatred" in the sense of standing opposed to the enemies of God. One is self-centered, the other God-centered. No need to resort to Whorfianism and conspiracies against language to explain the variances in meaning between these two passages.