/lit/ - Literature

You will always have a box. You will always have a pardigm. There will always be a locus through which you view the world. The effort to escape it only puts you in one that is not of your choosing. Everyone serves some master, wittingly or unwittingly.

Wtf do you mean spiritual prison
If you don't believe in it then stop following it and find something you can believe in.

>>18729355
You can reject boxes created by others, and make your own.

>>18729358
>find something you can believe in.
I find that searching for another perspective to box yourself in does not help, you're just moving from one cell to another.

>We are all conceived in close Prison; in our Mothers wombes, we are close Prisoners all ; when we are borne, we are borne but to the liberty of the house ; Prisoners still, though within larger walls; and then all our life is but a going out to the place of Execution, to death. Now was there ever any man seen to sleep in the Cart, between Newgate, and Tyborne? between the Prison, and the place of Execution, does any man sleep? And we sleep all the way ; from the womb to the grave we are never throughly awake; but passe on with such dreames, and imaginations as these, I may live as well, as another, and why should I dye, rather then another ? but awake, and tell me, sayes this Text, Quis homo ? who is that other that thou talkest of ? What man is he that liveth, and shall not see death?

>>18729400
lol he said homo

>>18729348
>i like objective beauty
>animeshit
shit faggot

>>18729348
>freeing yourself from it
Whatever for?
What, you think modern life isn't chaotic and pointless enough?

>>18729529
>you should pretend to believe in things that are antithetical to your beliefs because modern life is bad

>>18729348
You and the anon in your image are espousing existentialism. You're criticizing "boxes created by others," but you're just regurgitating one of the dominant philosophies of our times.

>>18729579
Modern existentialists assume there is no meaning and that nihilism is true and should be overcome though. I don't feel that way because I'm not an atheist materialist. Don't confuse rejection of spiritual dogma with rejection of all meaning.

>>18729594
>Modern existentialists assume there is no meaning
That's not at all what modern existentialists believe. "Be true to yourself," "Be authentic," "Live your own truth" - these are the modern existentialist's mottos, and they're precisely what you're promoting here.

>>18729394
Stop looking for "a box" and start with what *you* actually believe. Don't let yourself get bogged down with labels or identity markers. Don't limit yourself to this or that ideology; allow yourself to flow between them and find your own place.

>>18729604
I mean, is that supposed to be a bad thing though?

>>18729604
I'm not promoting anything, I'm asking for books about the ideas I talk about in the OP. If you disagree because you have your own dogma then exit the thread and move on.
>"Be true to yourself," "Be authentic," "Live your own truth"
There's nothing wrong with this in my mind, so if that is supposed to be an argument against existentialism, I don't know what to tell you.
>>18729608
Yeah, I know. I have a few strong beliefs, that don't necessarily fit a single ideology, system or religion. The need to belong somewhere is natural even though just "flowing" between various things is good because it avoids getting stranded in the spiritual prisons I refer to.

>>18729668
My point is that you can never escape the box. Attempting to escape the box puts you back in the box. Here's the thing about authenticity: it is unaware of itself. The moment you look for it, it flees.

>>18729700
>Here's the thing about authenticity: it is unaware of itself. The moment you look for it, it flees.
Based crypto-taoist

>>18729700
t. archon

No.

>>18729696
You're need to belong won't be solved with ideology. It can be solved by meeting people and being part of a healthy social circle. Having strong ideological beliefs may actually hinder this (speaking from experience)

>>18729706
FUCK
your*

>>18729706
>You're need to belong won't be solved with ideology.
This is a good point. I am erroneously assuming that spirituality should take into account the need to belong.
That being said, are there actual examples in literature of people who had their idiosyncratic belief systems? I can only think of William Blake.

>>18729472
Anime website

>>18729369
you can't

>>18729899
Sure you can. Take them as inspiration for your own beliefs.

>>18729348
Because here's something else that's weird but true: in the day-to day trenches of adult life, there is actually no such thing as atheism. There is no such thing as not worshipping. Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship. And the compelling reason for maybe choosing some sort of god or spiritual-type thing to worship—be it JC or Allah, be it YHWH or the Wiccan Mother Goddess, or the Four Noble Truths, or some inviolable set of ethical principles—is that pretty much anything else you worship will eat you alive. If you worship money and things, if they are where you tap real meaning in life, then you will never have enough, never feel you have enough. It's the truth. Worship your body and beauty and sexual allure and you will always feel ugly. And when time and age start showing, you will die a million deaths before they finally grieve you. On one level, we all know this stuff already. It's been codified as myths, proverbs, clichés, epigrams, parables; the skeleton of every great story. The whole trick is keeping the truth up front in daily consciousness.

tao te king
ashtavakra gita
i am that

>>18729939
>Everybody worships
Doesn't mean you need to worship someone else's idol.

>>18729706
>Having strong ideological beliefs may actually hinder this (speaking from experience)
No it doesn't. Everyone has strong ideological beliefs. They just don't refer to them as ideology. See MacIntyre's essay "The End of Ideology and the End of the End of Ideology" in Against the Self-Images of the Age.

>>18729862
cope dilate

>>18730104
What beats dilate again? sneed I guess

>>18729348
>god, this shilling is really brainwashing me, even if I don't believe any of it
>please counter-brainwash me please

>>18730203
>>god, this shilling is really brainwashing me, even if I don't believe any of it
Yes, that's how psyops work. Continuous exposure to bullshit will take a toll on you even if it goes against your beliefs.

>>18729348
Isn't that exactly what Nietzsche wrote about?

>>18730231
Which of his books talk about this?

>>18730213
seek help. Spirituality in the form of religion or metaphysics is the only path towards enlightenment.

>>18730275
>Spirituality in the form of metaphysics
Yes, and? Are you under the impression I'm rejecting spirituality or something? Just organized religious ideologies.

>>18730301
would you prefer intellectual materialism over organized religion? I for one believe it to be a great alternative to the former.

>>18730340
>intellectual materialism
Is this somehow distinct from materialism? I'm not a materialist, my views are closer to some kind of panpsychism.

>>18730347
I have no clue what panpsychism is. Sounds homosexual. intellectual matieralism is anything other than intelligence because it ultimately leads to the preservation of progress that tends towards calculation. The point being is that your revolt against religion is absurd. Seek help.

>>18730361
I'm not interested in the bullshit you're trying to peddle or in your opinion. Go shill somewhere else.

>>18730366
>I don't want to know anything about what I don't want to know
>MY BELIEFS ARE MY OWN!!!
homosexuality is propaganda by the way

>>18730396
Yeah I'm not interested in things I don't believe in. You're in a spiritual prison, if it's comfortable to you then by all means stay in it, but I don't want that for me so I'm looking elsewhere. Don't enter threads about subjects you don't like and then proceed to get upset.

>>18729712
>>18730245
Bump for these

>>18730428
Anyone

>>18730213
>even if it goes against your beliefs.
There is no "true me" to discover.

>>18730935
Why do you say that?

>>18729348
lmao I was in this thread yesterday. It ended with me and like 3 other anons arguing with like maybe 6 different Christians on the merits of their religion, and they ignored nearly everything we presented them with and focused entirely on "but he rose from the dead." Someone else's argument (probably the one coherent Christian in the entire thread) made this argument about reverence being necessarily correlated with fear because of the Hebrew word 'yare' which I learned basically just means 'reverence and fear' together. When it was pointed out to him that he was correlating two unrelated things he insisted that the other poster was the one doing so--yeah right

>>18731067
I know, it was a complete clusterfuck. Hopefully you won't summon that shit here with your post.
I had already made up my mind of course, but that thread was the last nail in the coffin of Christianity for me.

The tiger
He destroyed his cage
Yes
YES
The tiger is out

>>18731077
Based.

>>18730935
He was speaking about beliefs, not a "true self." Of course, the enemy of all depersonalizing, dehumanizing religions is the "true self" that cannot be molded or extricated from the man, that ever serves as a thorn in the side of ideas of free will and unequivocal accountability.

There is no true self, that is constantly being made. There is a higher self, and you have to decide if an organization's formulas, your own seeking, or both will help you achieve that.

The only issue is that the organized (religion, church, program, etc) may become a very jealous idol that does not allow for innovation or questioning. And so we raise a generation of church-adherent botchlings and old women, along with great hordes of apostates for whom we only have that church to blame.

>>18731075
Good for you anon. It is difficult to release yourself from the cycle of guilt and shame this society has conditioned you into. If it were easy, Christianity would not be so successful. I'd suggest the Tao Te Ching as a beginning as well as therapy to undo the decades of trauma.
For fiction I'd recommend A Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man by James Joyce. It's a semi-autobiographical account of him growing up Catholic in Ireland and gets very very deep into just the ideas which you are searching for. I won't give anything away but the conflict was very familiar to me growing up Catholic and Joyce, being a stream of consciousness writer, really digs into the precise psychology of this experience. I won't give it away. Let me know if you've already read it then maybe I could suggest something else,

>>18731067
>>18731075
That was a fine thread. Learned that you can add "epistemological weight" to your arguments by declaring they have "epistemological weight" as if you were going through customs at the airport and had to declare which doctrines you had in your luggage.

>>18731123
Thanks a lot, I appreciate the suggestions. I haven't read Joyce nor the Tao Te Ching yet, although I am somewhat familiar with taoism.
The guilt-tripping aspect of abrahamism is one thing, for me what I struggled to detach from the most was the "uniqueness" aspect, the claims of Christianity being unique and different from all other religions in many ways, and the claim that any sincere investigation of truth would eventually lead back to it, but in retrospect this now seems like wishful thinking, confirmation bias and just plain old dishonesty. The shame thing never really affected me though because I was not raised in a strongly Christian environment.
>maybe I could suggest something else
Anything you believe is related to this subject is appreciated.

>>18731110
What is the difference between a true self and a higher self? Are you saying that "true" self implies that it is static, which is impossible?

>>18731148
>in awe at the size of this absolute epistemological unit

>>18731173
I have a superficial understanding of the topic, but my impression of the "true self" is that there is a "real you" that needs to be found that all sorts of organizations and "memeplexes" are keeping you away from. But that "true self" is usually a state of equilibrium and self-realization, so it's a sort of "higher self" in reality.

You always are your "self." I just renamed "true self" to "higher self"

>>18731205
I think the point about the "real you" is that your understanding of the self is obscured by delusion and that you need to realize what you really are. This is the point dharmists make but it's also kind of present in Plato with his description of what happens after death in Phaedo

>>18731227
Thanks, anon. But what would realizing "what you really are" entail? Is it an ideal state, leading to greater fulfillment and joy, or what?

>>18731237
I think it's supposed to be a kind of "waking up". Like when you become lucid in a dream or whatever. Realizing your true nature and the nature of reality. This would obviously lead to fulfillment and joy and I guess it could be called an ideal state, but in the end nothing would change (in this life) since you would still be playing your current role, so you would keep chopping wood and carrying water, so to speak. I'm no expert though so I might be saying nonsense.

>>18731148
based

>>18731150
Happy to help anon

>The guilt-tripping aspect of abrahamism is one thing, for me what I struggled to detach from the most was the "uniqueness" aspect, the claims of Christianity being unique and different from all other religions in many ways, and the claim that any sincere investigation of truth would eventually lead back to it, but in retrospect this now seems like wishful thinking, confirmation bias and just plain old dishonesty.
Yes that was touched on in the thread by one poster referring to the 'gaslighting' aspect of Christianity. They project onto nonbelievers their insecurity at the fragility of their system. It seems like you're on the right track.
Another writer I would suggest is William Blake, as i've been meaning to read him myself for his relationship with spiritual prisons. He basically constructed a mythos and system of thought with his poetry that explains the narrowness of the Christian mindset, what he referred to as 'single vision.' This progresses in stages ('double vision' to 'fourfold vision') to end at a place which actually incorporates differences and multiplicity into world view and etc. Unironically this poster >>18731077 was very close to Blake introducing the Tiger into this thread as the Tiger is a main archetype of his writing, representing the chaotic energy contrary to dominating Christian thought (how Blake defines, and this distinct definition is very important for his system, 'evil').
"The tygers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction."
My interest in Blake is that the further he gets away from 'single-vision' the closer he approaches Eastern doctrines which actually understand the true nature of reality.

>>18731269
>Another writer I would suggest is William Blake, as i've been meaning to read him myself for his relationship with spiritual prisons
Be the change you want to see in /lit/ and actually read what you are discussing

>>18731269
>They project onto nonbelievers their insecurity at the fragility of their system.
Pretty much. "You don't get to question any of this because your capacity for reason is inferior to God's", "yes I know other religions make more sense but that's just demons deceiving you", etc. It's pretty obvious when you point it out but it's deceptively subtle.
Blake is on my reading list as well and his mythos seems fascinating. Are there other poets, writers or thinkers who actually came up with their own mythos based on their personal beliefs?
>Eastern doctrines which actually understand the true nature of reality.
I'm guessing you're referring to nondualism?

>>18731311
Well my interest was sparked by a colleague who wrote a dissertation on evil and referenced Blake quite a bit. I have read his poetry a bit but i feel his work requires more dedication than i can spare without neglecting my studies.

>>18731390
>Are there other poets, writers or thinkers who actually came up with their own mythos based on their personal beliefs?
let me think on that

>I'm guessing you're referring to nondualism?
yes pretty much

I'd also recommend Steppenwolf and The Wisdom of Insecurity, both of these books approach Eastern doctrines in a way easily understood through a Western lense. I find these more accessible than Joyce, but the order is up to you of course.

>>18731499
>yes pretty much
To be completely impartial, if you look at mystics in Christianity or Islam a lot of them will say things that closely resemble some kind of nondualism, but I get what you mean. Nondualism is actually incorporated in eastern doctrine and not seen as heterodox or a fringe belief. For other reasons though I'm not completely convinced by eastern religions.
>Steppenwolf
I've read Siddhartha and planned on reading Demian so I guess that's right up my alley.
>The Wisdom of Insecurity
I'm a bit skeptical of Watts, his kind of new age guruism makes me a bit skeptical, even though he was a good orator.

>>18729348
Look no further OP./

>>18732027
My impression is that Stirner's position concerned mainly ethics, not metaphysics, am I wrong?

>>18729355
"Neither a son nor a subject should look upon his person as his own"

>>18732043
I would say yes. Of those abstractions like religion, or the state, or ideology he calls them spooks. They don't serve the individual. His work will definitely help you negate the religious propaganda, as well as the state propaganda and other isms.

>>18732093
>the state propaganda and other isms.
Those have never even registered to me as important anyway, thankfully.

>>18729348
This is the book you're looking for, OP

>>18731512
>To be completely impartial, if you look at mystics in Christianity or Islam a lot of them will say things that closely resemble some kind of nondualism, but I get what you mean. Nondualism is actually incorporated in eastern doctrine and not seen as heterodox or a fringe belief. For other reasons though I'm not completely convinced by eastern religions.
I found this in Augustine but it no where near approaches Eastern thought. It's much closer to Platonism which asserts that reality and the physical realm is composed of disparate forms which all participate in the supreme form of Truth. For Augustine the idea is that all things except falsehoods and sin participate in truth and ergo participate in God and vice versa. The issue is the intense separation created by distinguishing between right/wrong and sin/grace, i don't necessarily believe that all things are permissible, but just that things are much more complicated than strict binaries of one system of thought and that things make much more sense considered nondualisticlly.

>>18732277
2/2
This is another way Christians do the whole gaslighting thing. "Eastern thought asserts that God is everywhere, but we invented that!"

>>18732223
The OP is about "no religion is right" while Evola is about "all religions are right"

>>18732297
No that's not what he's about. He didn't think all religions nor all forms of spirituality were equally right but he thought most religions / traditions had some form of metaphysical truth within them.
The reason OP should read it is because it helps one understand the religious / metaphysical worldview. Eliade has written books with the same aim which are also excellent.

>>18729348
>I believe in cyclical time
That's autistic af. Everything has to come to an end.

>>18731512
>I'm a bit skeptical of Watts, his kind of new age guruism makes me a bit skeptical, even though he was a good orator.
and i forgot to reply to this. Really just give the book a shot. He doesn't get as deep into metaphysics as you maybe are searching for, but i find his demonstrations insightful and comprehensive enough. I think this book of his answers your question though. It reads pretty well. I think hatred of him can come from a place of needing him to be the kind of thinker he wasn't and elitism and needing to read more complicated things. Here is the table of contents to give you a bit of context:

1. The age of anxiety
2. pain and time
3. the great stream
4 the wisdom of the body
5. on being aware
6. the marvelous moment
7. the transformation of life
8. creative morality
9. religion reviewed

i actually found a pdf online too which you don't need to download:, just read the first chapter and see what you think
https://antilogicalism.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/wisdom-of-insecurity.pdf

>>18732323
>trying to rope OP into religion again

>>18732347
How did you get that from what I said? Evola wasn't even religious in the strict sense

>>18732277
>Augustine
Maybe check out Eckhart, Rumi, Farid Attar (pretty much all the sufi mystics), and maybe the hesychasts since sometimes they describe their practices in a way that leans into nondualism.
You're right about the gaslighting part though

>>18732208
It all has the same effect however.

>>18732336
Thank you anon.

>>18732325
>he doesn't know

>>18732382
of course
good luck

How do you dismiss the fact that Christianity verifiably has the most amounts of miracles of any other religion, that it has no internal inconsistencies and that Christ's name is the only one that carries any substantial amount of power whenever people are struggling against malevolent entities?

>>18732469
Please, not this again. Everything you said is a personal perspective. Just go away.

>>18732469
>verifiably has the most amounts of miracles of any other religion
Holy based. I am crushed beneath your epistemological weight.

>>18732488
kek I hope this becomes a meme

>>18729348

The ultimate spiritual prison is being enslaved to the passions and enslaved to lies.

The problem that you're trying to solve, as you're stating it can't be fixed - if you want to free yourself from dogma, then you must accept the dogma that dogma is what you must be free from, and other unquestionable truths that self-contradict. "There is no ultimate truth" is the most popular unquestioned religious dogma in the world right now.

You cannot escape belief, and you cannot escape truth in the world. If you cannot escape truth in the world, then there must be something that is actually spiritually true.

If the problem you wanted to solve is "I want to know the truth", then you are might actually get somewhere fruitful. But if all you want to do is figure out how to not believe in dogmas, then all you are going to do is believe someone else's dogmas about how you shouldn't believe dogmas (except for the dogmas they tell you).

>>18732542
>you must accept the dogma that dogma is what you must be free from
No. This isn't a dogmatic opinion, it's a personal choice to reject useless ideologies. It's not "adopting an ideology of rejecting ideology" because I'm not a skeptic and I have my own beliefs.

>>18732488
Why is only Christianity effective against demonic possession and other evil influences? Just answer me this. Why do all the foreign mystics who converted agree that the light of Christ reveals the demonic nature of all other religions, while other religions never make similar claims? Be honest now.

>>18732567

>>18731067
yeah you really btfo dem xtians with your ebin infographics

>>18732604
So you don't want to answer?
Why do former yoga practitioners respond so strongly to exorcisms and behave exactly as if they were possessed? Why do experiences from foreign religions all fit the descriptor of demonic influence? Why do you refuse to answer?

>>18732567
excellent bait

>>18729369
What would this box of your own have over others to make it better? How would you even create it, if not by starting from the box you already are in?

>>18732552

Rejecting useless ideologies isn't the same as disbelieving in dogma. A dogmatic belief is one that is held to be undeniably true, whether it's a personal dogma, or a collective dogma, is irrelevant, if you believe that what you believe is actually true, and not just "true for you".

To disbelieve in all dogma, you would have to completely disbelieve in truth altogether.

>>18732631
>What would this box of your own have over others to make it better?
What do other people's boxes have over my own that makes them inherently better?
Nothing. "Old thing good" is not true, and argumentum ad populum isn't either.

>>18732636
Okay fine I get your point. I have my own dogma then.

>>18732567
>why do people who converted think the religion they converted to is better than the religions they didn't convert to

>>18732671
Strawman. "Christians" who convert to Hinduism or some other religion never have such powerful experiences that indicate the falsehood of their previous religion.

>>18732678
Getting a bit too obvious now.

>>18729348
Read Tolstoy’s Confession & The Kingdom of God Is Within You. He tried to separate himself from the prevailing orthodoxy of his time and place, maybe his experience will speak to you. Personally I think that if you separate yourself from all the wisdom of those who came before you to strike out on your own, you’re likely to wind up in a state of delusion. This has already been happening on a mass scale in modern times, the mass spiritual dissolution & confusion we see today is the result

>>18732716
I don't think that's good reasoning for this reason >>18732642. A majority of people believing something doesn't make it true, and this is true of everything. The mass spiritual dissolution we're seeing today is because physicalism/scientism is the religion of the 21st century, so people don't even have a spiritual paradigm anymore. This doesn't mean they should necessarily turn to institutional ideologies.
You bring up confusion, but in my case, I had never been more confused about my spirituality than when I started getting wooed by institutional religion, whereas before (and after) I was/am much more secure and certain.

>>18732469
>How do you dismiss the fact that Christianity verifiably has the most amounts of miracles of any other religion
As per Spinoza: there are a lot of Christians, so they have more Saints and more bad people than the Jews.
>that it has no internal inconsistencies
Why is there a Schism then, why can't the Orthodox see the error of their way and reconcile with the Catholic Church?
>And that Christ's name is the only one that carries any substantial amount of power whenever people are struggling against malevolent entities?
His Mother's name also makes the demons seethe, but I'll concede that point since only Christianity shows those results. Meanwhile the islamic Marabout mumbles surah and agitates his arms until the Djinn is bored - such is the power of the Ruquiah.

>>18732567
The Buddha has 86,000 magical relics. So what's your point?

>>18732567
Except I overcame possession without the help of Christianity. It turns out daemons (not demons, that's a bastardization of the term) aren't even malevolent spirits but instead the more amoral tutors that the pagans knew them as. So the pagan ways of working with them works way better than the Christian brute force method.

>>18732742
I’m not making either of those arguments. I’m saying that throwing out all ‘spiritual dogma’ is basically homer simpson saying everyone is stupid except me.

>>18732879
>the pagan ways of working with them
Like what?

>>18732900
Blame all your manic ravings on the daemon of Apollo like Plato had Socrates do.

>>18732900
buying scented candles from amazon

>>18732910
Didn't Plato believe we all had a daemon?

>>18732846
>I'll concede that point since only Christianity shows those results.
This is because Christ is more powerful than the idols of other religions, thus Christianity is true.

>>18732937
Not more powerful than a few Italian carpenters and some nails.

>>18732984
You are being intentionally disingenuous and we both know it. Why do you refuse to engage honestly since you seem so sure that Christianity is false?
Explain miracles such as Vittorio Michelli's miraculous healing that has baffled physicians. No such things happen in other religions.

>>18733029
>No such things happen in other religions.
Buddha relics have worked miracles for 2500 years. I suggest you read up on the topic. They outnumber Christianity, although they did have a headstart. Nevertheless, since there are so many, they must be true, and we don't have to bother with a genuine or earnest discussion of doctrine and teaching because we have magic. Holy based.

>>18733043
>since there are so many, they must be true
They are not documented or confirmed. The case I was talking about was confirmed by actual physicians.

>>18733029
There are records or Islamic saints performing miracles, but I don't think they're true. The true miracle of Islam is the code placed into the Qu'ran by Allah. It is based on the number 19 and was discovered by Rashad Khalifa(pbuh) using computers in the 70's.

>>18733065
>confirmed by actual physicians
Let me guess, "we don't have a solid explanation for this particular case so sure god did it"

>>18729355
No

>>18733089
No. Look up Vittorio Michelli. Or look up Saint Veronica Giuliani and the sworn statements made by her doctors. Or do you fear being convinced?

>>18733097
But Buddhism is a religion. It's a box. For example you can't say there's an immortal soul in Buddhism, because its paradigm is against it.

>>18733117
This is a silly conversation. Not everyone is swayed by magicians into adopting an entire religious paradigm. It is so obvious from which stratum of society this faith originates!

>>18733117
How do you differentiate between demonic manifestations (because other religions have such miraculous occurrences) and a Godly miracle?

>>18733145
>other religions have such miraculous occurrences
Which ones are similarly well documented and attested to, and only involve healing with nothing in return (sacrifices, mortification and so on)?

>>18733145
A pagan "demon" would do well to appear to Christians as a saint or angel. For faithful Christians will be punished if they saw, say Athena, while there is no reason a pagan god cannot take on culturally relative forms, as they were thought to have done in ancient times e.g. in the Hellenistic world, the near east, etc. So if these gods do play benevolent roles they would not want to bring harm and persecution to their people.

>>18733161
>god sacrificed himself (to himself) to put me in eternal debt to him so christer miracles don't involve sacrifices
Nothing in life is free. Better pay your debt or sin will accumulate

>>18733176
You did not answer the question. Why are you deflecting?

>>18729348
Count of Monte Cristo

>>18733185
That wasn't me; and it doesn't matter how "well documented" the story is. Anything can be falsified, anything can be edited and lost in translation.

Besides, your question is entirely besides the point. I was asking for the difference between a demonic occurrence (something Christian sources attest to as well as well as current, verifiable, human sources- as you yourself have confirmed in the thread when asking why only the name of Jesus Christ repels demons; although I've heard stories where other remedies have also worked) and an Angelica occurrence.
It is a purely theoretical discussion, neither of us need real examples.

>>18730347
are you the guy I talked to yesterday in the Evola thread? I talked about the Eternal Recurrence

>>18733161
laotse was born from a woman's armpit

>>18732642
it is tremendously arrogant to assume there's virtue in rejecting tradition for the sole purpose of personal liberty. Religions aren't invented by one person and no matter what you will never attain spiritual transcendence unless you embrace the wisdom of the past that is collective in origin.

>>18733611
>transcendence is going backwards
Absolutely regressive

>>18729348
How can any person that has the slighest interest in being "good" have a morality contrary to catholic doctrine?
Sure there might be small things and disagreements, but that doctrine is fundamentally about teaching people to be "good"
The only way I can understand that is if they are using a malicously deformed strawman of catholicism

>>18733611
>many people came up with it and believed in it so it's true
Just stop posting

>>18733611
This is such a retarded argument. So because something is old and has lots of backing that means it can't be false? Large groups of people deluding themselves by buying into their own bullshit throughout history is unheard of, right? Do you even know what ideologies are and what they imply? Do you think religions start out as communities and that the group dynamic isn't preceded by an individual's impulse?
"You will never attain transcendence unless you subscribe to an ideology" is the kind of fear mongering tactic that was described earlier ITT and it's so transparent. No, people don't need to confine themselves into a religion out of fear of missing out on authentic(tm) spirituality. This is nonsense.

>>18733611
>>18735209
This also implies an "all or nothing" stance where you're either part of a religion or reject everything unconditionally and refuse to be informed by other philosophies in order to refine your own, which is a stupid strawman.

>>18729355
>Everyone serves some master, wittingly or unwittingly.
True, but the maestro who serves creative genius is subject to the least harsh and arbitrary order. It is the followers of hacks who suffer the most from misrule and the cramped perspectives implicit in the bad taste of both.

Seeing much more anti-ideological/anti-institutional religion sentiment on /lit/ lately (this thread, the holographic thread, the various gnosis threads that pop up every other day, even Monroe threads), are anons growing out of the trad phase, is it simply a small paradigm shift, what's happening?

>>18735664
the LARP meta is changing

>>18735665
Anti-ideology implies anti-larp; there's always going to be a degree of larping but I find these threads much more genuine and authentic than the circlejerks we've had on here for the past couple years.

>>18733163
Most pagan gods and Yahweh are egregores at the end of the day, surely some genuinely transcendent beings have manifested themselves throughout history but a majority of them are creations that sprung from the collective. Which is not to mean they are not real (on the contrary), but their existence is inherently malleable and cyclical.

>>18735664
The change has been predicted for a long time. Jung predicted it in Aion, but saw it through a Christian lens. The part abrahamism had to play, its cycle, has come to an end, and a new spirituality will arise from it (not new age; this is merely a corruption of spirituality that boils down to physicalism).
This guy is a Christian, but he explains it well nonetheless https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTBDrrHl5V0

>>18735664
I personally dont see any difference between institutional religion and more sub cultural stuff, the latter are just less organized. They're both a set of beliefs that group of people argue about but mostly agree on.

>>18735668
>I find these threads much more genuine and authentic than the circlejerks we've had on here
it's just the novelty

>>18735873
>more sub cultural stuff,
They are inherently idiosyncratic. If you check out the schizo gnostic threads, pretty much everyone believes in different things specifically, but they have a common general view of existence that makes them overlook their metaphysical disagreements. Some people are hardcore dualists and literally believe in archons and so on, some people are jungians who see it as metaphorical, some people have weird schizo views like PKD, some people aren't even gnostics but agree that the world is illusory, and so on.
Contrast with religion threads with the bickering over details and people calling each other heretics over a different interpretation of some inconsequential line in scripture.
>>18735879
More like a breath of fresh air honestly, it's not about the novelty in itself.

>>18735882
>Contrast with religion threads with the bickering over details and people calling each other heretics
I see the same thing in the gnostic threads, they just say 'hylic'. Organized religion is rife with debate as well, that's why it splinters so much, and even within a tradition there are many arguments about the correct interpretations of scripture and their relation to metaphysical questions.

>>18735891
>hylic
I see that in response to posts like "take meds" and Christian proselytes, not much else.
Not to mention the personal interpretations are ever-evolving and inherently individual, the understanding of it being a deeply personal journey that draws upon various sources to arrive at a coherent conclusion (some might call it gnosis). This is more appealing in my opinion.
However we're arguing about surface-level stuff, the point being that in one case there is a rejection of ideology, a kind of liberation in order to fully embrace one's personal beliefs and perspective, which to me is the only possible path.

>>18735891
>they just say 'hylic'
I'm still 100% sure this word became popular because of the videogame

>>18735906
>a rejection of ideology
I dont think this is really possible. You have to operate according to speculative metaphysical frameworks merely to think or do anything and your beliefs are largely given to you by your environment. Even this notion of a personal quest is a particular schema you have been made aware of by some external source

>>18735917
Should've said "rejection of institutionalized ideologies".

>>18732879
>I overcame possession
>it turns out demons arent malevolent they can teach you
I'm not christian but it sure doesnt sound like you overcame it, sounds like they tricked you

>>18735930
>I'm not christian but
Then why do you use their talking points?
"What isn't Christian is evil and if you come to the conclusion it's not then it's because you got tricked"

>>18733794
That's the whole point of abrahamism
Desperately holding on to a part of the cycle when human spirituality has moved on

bump

>>18729348
Oh well, try the Mirror of Simple Souls, it's a book very much in keeping with what you have requested, although you may find it too Phlegmatic for your tastes.

>>18736838
She was burned at the stake for that, wasn't she?
>too Phlegmatic
What do you mean?

>>18735935
An amoral being that possesses you doesnt sound very trustworthy to me, and it is probably worse than it presents itself as

>>18736857
No entity is trustworthy because they all have their own agendas. Doesn't mean you can't work with them.

>>18736845
Impassive, composed

>>18736857
How do you know that a being is good or evil? The fruits of their actions? Many angels will be demons, and many angels will be demons, then. Turns our entire view topsy-turvy; no, there needs to be another standard

>>18736894
Does it even matter? Just never relinquish your sovereignty or make deals with any entity.

>>18729348
I dont think it makes any sense to read anti spiritual books. Just get a proper philosophical and scientific education. I suggest you start here: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UcARywxD1w8

>>18736877
That's fine. Is her view completely opposed to Christian doctrine or is it still within the confines of it, just not church-approved?

>>18729369
You're just gonna end up reinventing the wheel

>>18736994
>you're gonna end up reinventing claims of revelations frome established religious institutions
Doubt it. The point is to make your own system, not to make everything from scratch but to have a holistic mindset.

>>18729348

>>18737024
Is this really good? I am wary of eastern gurus.

>>18736935
>scientific
Why?

>>18731148
kek

>>18736936
Mostly still within the confines of doctrine

wait, people actually fall for the religious larp?
I do that for fun since my christian upbringing made me semi knowledgeable on how to indoctrinate people.

>>18738516
Based cult leader

>>18729355
this

>>18729348
Truth and Method by Gadamer will throw you for a loop anon.

>>18729348

I'm happy that the person who posted this doens't believe in god, but it's still drivel.

>>18729348
Extremely based anime avi......

>>18738516
Why did you abandon the faith of your fathers anon

>>18729348
>I just want literature on the subject of spiritual dogma and freeing yourself from it.
haha, just read about the history of TM or Scientology. 'Feet of Clay' was pretty amusing full of stories from a wide range of cults. 'Going Clear' by Lawrence Wright about Scientology. 'When the Saints go Marching In, Zen hagiography' - hilarious stories of modern western zen scandals, like the 90 year old japanese roshi molesting the western seeker babes in the dokusan chamber

https://www.eyeofchan.org/docs/english/pdf/WhenTheSaintsGoMarching.pdf

>>18729348
'True Believer' by Hoffer is a classic still in print

>>18732716
>Read Tolstoy’s Confession & The Kingdom of God Is Within You. He tried to separate himself from the prevailing orthodoxy of his time and place, maybe his experience will speak to you. Personally I think that if you separate yourself from all the wisdom of those who came before you to strike out on your own, you’re likely to wind up in a state of delusion. This has already been happening on a mass scale in modern times, the mass spiritual dissolution & confusion we see today is the result
yes, very very few get through the 'makyo'/'bedeviling illusions'/'shamanic sickness'/'spiritual emergency'/'kundalini' phase, they take some vision or experience as a finality, rather than just a stage on the way to metanoia. following a tradition with a long history of those who have persisted through the makyo stage is very helpful indeed.

Science is great. Its really something else that we have tests and verifiable predictions. Its wacky as fuck that we have an over-evolved monkey mind that invents and discovers systems like logic. Hell, its crazy these astronomical distances full of burning gas, or these fuck-huge aggregates of swirling colorful gas in out solar system.

But man oh man, its hard to go on when you realize that we know absolutely nothing. Not the slightest clue what this is about. Vacuum fluctuations shit out universes? Great. Why are those laws in place? Why are vacuum?

We can never answer why there should be anything. All of these endeavors can describe shapes and forms, but fall flat next to real knowledge.

Nothing can be known. That's where I start from. Even if it got explained by my creator, he would have to pony up that he doesn't know why he is.

Its almost like explanations, purpose, cause/effect are human inventions we assign to all this. We could never trust any answers because we made up that concept.

>>18740844
>attainments from other paths is bullshit but attainment from my path is right!
Yes, yes, we know, fuck off now

Why has nobody recommended UG Krishnamurti yet?

>>18741679
He was a materialist

>>18729348
>this board was getting to me even though I actually don't believe in any of this shit. I need books to counteract the psyop and give me a fresh perspective.
>I'm not a materialist or atheist nor am I looking for books that support that position, I just want literature on the subject of spiritual dogma and freeing yourself from it.

https://web.archive.org/web/20190305072817/https://web.archive.org/web/20151101163834/https://deathofcommunism.weebly.com/

https://www.dropbox.com/s/3g8yky1d35s370f/Exposing_Islam.pdf?dl=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7xuas6uiqroslk8/Exposing_Christianity_28-05-16.pdf?dl=1

>>18741907
What is that picture of Thoth supposed to represent?

>>18732984
>>18733043
>>18733089
>>18733139
See
>>18735367
>>18735413
>>18735443

>>18742057
What the fuck is this garbage

>>18742435
Another day, another christer thinks his millennarian bleating is compelling, though for whatever reason now it's orthodox and not pentacostal

>>18742451
You gotta admit the great reset vaccine shit is spooky though

>>18741918
maths so smarg

>>18742507
Numbers aren't math

>>18742536
its genetic information>>18741918
its genetic information im not entirely sure what the correlation is, im not a genetecist. i just love the picture.

>>18742548
That pic is kinda gay bro

>>18733794
>>18735179
>>18735209
>>18735216
Ancient people were dealing with a much harsher reality than today, they were in direct contact with human wickedness. Ancient people who made quite remarkable feats of intellect regarding human nature, society, the world, and so on did not simply reject spirituality. While I understand that imprinting and a cultural environment where religion is the norm are massive forces, I would also believe that dismissing religion entirely on the grounds that "past people were dumb lol" is a huge brainlet take, especially considering that all the promises of humanism absolutely crashed and burned.

>>18742563
>did not simply reject spirituality.
And neither does the OP or anyone you're arguing against. Dismissing institutional religion =/= rejecting spirituality.

>>18742563
>they were in direct contact with human wickedness
Me too, I live in a jewish neighborhood

>>18729348
Hey I made that post, thanks for reposting it :). Ask me anything and perhaps I could he
>I actually don't believe in any of this shit. I need books to counteract the psyop and give me a fresh perspective.
Same desu. Whenever I tred to follow a new line of thinking, like being a Catholic looking back it always felt I was just “pretending” even if not obviously, I could never really fully believe in any of it, at one moment I could think there was an afterlife and living a “saintly” life mattered and in the other I thought it was all pointless. Nor could I believe in paganism either because I was an inherit monotheist and only thought in monotheistic terms.

>I'm not a materialist or atheist nor am I looking for books that support that position, I just want literature on the subject of spiritual dogma and freeing yourself from it.
I would assume the philosophy of egoism, though I only say that because most people here have compared stuff I said to it, though you say your not a materialist so that is tricky. Perhaps create a credible “purpose” that is not some metaphysical jumbo jumbo like achieving “nirvana” or going to heaven, one that you can see the fruits of your labor of before you die, and not just quoting wealth but something of importance to yourself. I write about this in two different short stories I wrote, one character slowly realized there purpose and upon realizing it will do anything to fulfill it, even oppose the entire world, and in the other one character through experience is transformed from a religious zealot to a complete egoistic hedonist.

>>18730203
Shill? SHILL! At least im being real and not just some idiot in his room pretending he is some Catholic scholastic, Islamic fundamentalist or gnostic sage. The attempt at finding “purpose” in the pointless modern world is somehow even more hollow than the actual pointlessness. You people pick up religions and ideologies because you have nothing better to do, you don’t actually believe in them, and you know in your heart nothing will come from them.

>>18730275
>enlightenment
Why do you need enlightenment? People downplay the material realm but perhaps that is all that is. You ever think stupid monks and sages are chasing after something non existence, in all there wisdom they were there ultimate fools?

>>18732223
Im guy in screenshot. I read this book about a year ago and loved it, very interesting, especially the stuff about male/female duality, cycle of the ages and the world of symbols... however I could not say with certainty that I believe any of it on a spiritual level.

>>18743147
>not some metaphysical jumbo jumbo like achieving “nirvana” or going to heaven
Well this would apply if I was a larper like you say in >>18743231 and I didn't actually believe in the metaphysical, but I do; I just don't believe in established religion. I don't know if things like enlightenment and so on are important, or if they change anything once we die, but my belief that this life is not all there is is a genuine one, not a larp or something I try to convince myself of.

>>18732325
Each year the seasons happen. Animals die and there matter is absorbed by other being sand formed into other things. Civilization has been created and destroyed multiples. The universe has been created and destroyed multiple times. It is the most basic natural doctrine that Christians spit on with there death cult end times delusion, which I see as no different than the deranged hypothesis of the “heat death” of the universe being permanent.

>>18734305
> but that doctrine is fundamentally about teaching people to be "good"
Because it wants to reprogram and cleanse the personality of all its harshness and irregularities, if everyone follow the doctrine everyone would be the same

>>18743355
there was far more variety in people under the oppressive thumb of Christianity than there is today that everyone is free to do whatever

>>18743325
I see. Than honestly Revolt Against The Modern World as others have mentioned, is the best book for you, even I who am not sure of the afterlife or the absoluteness of morality swear by certain teachings of it (as I mentioned cyclical time)

>>18743374
Very unintuitive; expand on this claim further

>>18743388
I have yet to read Evola because I'm not sympathetic to traditionalism but I will try Revolt.

>>18732605
There it is, why do Christians get so assblasted and resentful when they get blown the fuck out in an internet argument? 4chan Christians are the most dishonest and inauthentic people around

>>18743551
Because they struggle with cognitive dissonance due to secretly being atheists and not actually believing in Christianity but rather being "Christian" as a contrarian fashion statement against society.

>>18743551
>4chan Christians are the most dishonest and inauthentic people around
4chan Christians are just American. They do the muh guns, muh Bible and muh freedum thing which is exquisitely American.

>>18729369
But the box of your own creation will inevitably be influenced by the boxes of others. How do you think you'll create your box? You'll take things you like and dislike from boxes you've been in before, and mix them together, inheriting their flaws as much as their strengths. No idea occurs in a vaccum. Your box will be a patchwork of parts from other peoples views. An original pattern perhaps, but ultimately using the same core pieces that you've seen others use before.

>>18743866
>will inevitably be influenced by the boxes of others
Yes.

>>18743866
The idea that you're supposed to create your own box is itself clearly a common box in our culture that came from somewhere

>>18743878
>The idea that you're supposed to create your own box is itself clearly a common box in our culture
It's really not.

>>18743878
>he thinks people create their own ideology
Just because most individuals have traded the "christianity" box for the "secular humanist/atheistic scientism" box doesn't mean they're not also confined in a pre-made box they don't bother to question.

>>18743890
It is and had been since Nietzsche and the existentialists. Even meme satanism had a similar line actually

>>18743986
>he thinks most people are nietzscheans or even inspired by nietzschean ideals
>he thinks most people aren't last men
See >>18743979

>>18743992
>>18743979
People are a bit sheep like but they do think they are supposed to 'construct their own identity and worldview' and whatever. This is a novel scenario really

>>18744015
>'construct their own identity and worldview'
...Within the bounds of what is considered acceptable. The box says "do what you want as long as you stay in the box", which really isn't much different from the previous boxes, except our perspective being born in this era fools us into believing it's not.

>>18743878
Everyone creates their own boxes. That's the point. They take parts of other peoples boxes and put them together in a way that they like. A man who believes unquestionably in Christ and the word of the church and a man who has developed his own beliefs by sampling from religions all over the world have both constructed their a box for themselves. The first man just happened to find his pieces all in the same place.

>>18743992
Is there such a thing as an idealist Nietzsche? In the philosophical sense

>>18729400
What is this basedness?

>>18742451
The reasoning is sound: the only religion that is being continuously bashed by the clown world is Christianity (denying this would be hypocritical). If you seek to align yourself against the world (which you should if you're not a complete NPC), then why wouldn't you side with the religion that is the most hated by it?
This is a genuine question, by the way.

>>18744129
bump

>>18744416
>other people hate this so I have to support it
you just exposed yourself along with all the other Christians on 4chan for being Christian by virtue of being contrarian

>>18744634
No, you're missing the point. If you agree with me that society is sick and in a clear downwards slope (if you disagree then I'd like you to tell me why) and that this coincides with a specific hatred for Christianity, which is much lesser than for other religions, then why do you not side with Christians?
It's a simple matter: if you think the powers that be are evil, and are honest enough to acknowledge they shit on Christianity whenever they can, doesn't that seem a little bit strange to you?

>>18744652
>No, you're missing the point. If you agree with me that society is sick and in a clear downwards slope (if you disagree then I'd like you to tell me why) and that this coincides with a specific hatred for Christianity,
society is sick and in decline because of Christianity and it’s morals. all the secular humanist atheists that have existed since the enlightenment criticize Christianity from its own moral standards ie the church is tyrannical, corrupt, decadent, it hides the truth, all men are equal and deserve rights and salvation, etc. please read or look at an over view of the Genealogy of Morals by Nietzsche and you’ll understand why. Christianity is not bad for the same reasons the average “liberal” hates it, it’s bad because it’s weak, resentful, on top of being false.

>>18744416
>the only religion being bashed
It is the most popular religion in the West. We have waves of disenchanted Muslims and Hindus hailing from their own countries and attacking their traditions.

But you have to understand that their greatest victory is not over Christianity but over those virtues that allow men to be good Christians or good anything. We're surrounded by distractions, perversion, and excesses. Most everything exploits our biology to extract more from us.

And it could just be bias on your part

>>18744672
You're deflecting and not addressing what I said. Why do movies, trends, celebrities and politicians do their best to subvert Christianity to the point that you could read Revelations right now and, by stretching a bit, make it fit current events? What is being attacked is not the Church but the symbols themselves: when religious symbology is being mocked, it's always Christ, the cross, Mary and so on. When the so called religious mentality is being attacked by atheists, it's always specifically Christian communities, never anyone else.
Society is in decline because of Christianity? Are you saying that everything that is currently going on that is utterly antithetical to Christian morality (the complete depravity and spiritual bankruptcy of the world) is because of Christianity? What twisted reasoning made you come to that conclusion?
You're giving me Nietzsche's opinion, I don't care about that, I want you to tell me why the world itself is against Christianity.

>>18744724
Why would an evil class do their best to validate Christians and Christianity by doing what you said?

Of course our religious symbols are being attacked; (((who))) do you think is doing this the most? They have the biggest problem with Christ, who dispossessed them.

The issue is that you think the world is against Christianity because they are demoniacs who recognize its inherent spiritual power over them. It could as easily be that it is a roadblock, so those in power patronize the resentful apostates of our time to attack Christianity.

Besides, if only one brand of Christianity is Godly, and the others are in demonic delusion, why is all of Christendom under attack?

>>18744754
>They have the biggest problem with Christ
If the powers of this world did not believe in Christ, why would they go to such lengths to drag everything that has to do with Christ through the mud?
>It could as easily be
It doesn't make sense that they would attack something they do not believe in with such hatred and vehemence. As you said yourself, they recognize its spiritual power. Why do they not attack Islam in such a way, even though (((they))) are despised by Islam? Why do they not attack eastern religions?
>if only one brand of Christianity is Godly, and the others are in demonic delusion
Catholicism is under attack more so than the rest, which suffer as a consequence by being affiliated with the Catholic Church.

>>18744764
From an outside perspective the catholic church honestly seems a bit suspect, especially in recent times. The orthodox seem to be carrying on the spirit a bit more faithfully

>>18744782
That's not particularly relevant to what I said in my post.

>>18744724
>our prophecy said people would oppose our religion in the future, and people are opposing it now!
this is near self-fulfilling levels of prophetic insight

>>18744785
The predictions were much more specific, you're not being honest. Look at what's going on in the world and tell me it isn't almost as if elites are going out of their way to fulfill biblical prophecies.
You should also ask yourself: why is it that Christianity draws such hatred from the worldly?

>>18744764
They drag everything noble through the mud, yet you cannot extrapolate that they have a special animus towards Christianity (for it is not just Christianity under attack, but also the components that make up Christianity). And it is not just Christianity under attack, but our history and culture in its entirety. Blitzkrieg against our identity to leave us empty, shocked senseless, and open to a new identity of their devising.

And no, I said that YOU think that the elites recognize some "spiritual power" in Christianity (like a possessed man has an aversion towards holy icons, recognizing their spiritual power, but involuntarily). They themselves attack nothing, they only fund or enable those that do. Or they create the circumstances that create more and more disgruntled, resentful atheists/agnostics. This is because the Christian ethic is a thorn in their side. Not because Christianity is true, and therefore you should become a Christian.

Catholicism is under attack, but each man's wounds hurt more than the others'. An American would claim Protestantism is under attack, and Catholicism is corrupted through and through. A Romanian would say the same of Orthodoxy, and they would all be correct, but only in their own countries. "Elites" don't engage in theological disputes, they just attack the regional Christianity, particularly its local figures and customs. Once again, this is to deracinate them. Otherwise they would not also attack the history/sexuality/sex of the peoples living there.

Besides, we are not living in non-Christian countries, I am sure. We cannot say if non-Christian countries are not experiencing the same opposition, but they would likely have different elites with a different modus operandi, anyway.

This is too broad of a discussion

>>18744796
If you had a spot of introspection, you could answer your own question- "Why do the worldly hate Christianity?"

In addition, them fulfilling the biblical prophecies could be coincidental (though I know this answer is irritating) or a self-fulfilling prophecy (they believe in the prophecies, but have a different interpretation of them and are actively, not as pawns of Fate/God but rather actively fulfilling them, either in service to their own interpretation, or to disprove Christianity, as Emperor Julian tried by attempting to build the third temple, or for some other, heretofore unguessed reason)

>>18744808
>you cannot extrapolate that they have a special animus towards Christianity
Observing current events will show you that this is not true. They don't care about people being proud of their history and culture as long as it doesn't imply Christian roots.
>They themselves attack nothing, they only fund or enable those that do.
This is just an indirect way of attacking. I think you're going through elaborate justifications to attempt to explain why the elites would somehow despise Christianity so profoundly, but not believe in it. Why all the satanic imagery then? And I don't mean that as hyperbole: genuine satanic imagery is plastered all over media. Is this coincidental?
>this is to deracinate them
Why do they not try to deracinate countries with other religions? I don't see Algerians, Indians or Thai people being the targets of such efforts.
>>18744817
>you could answer your own question
No, I already have my answer, I'd like you to tell me what you think.
>coincidental
Do you seriously believe this?
>self-fulfilling
Why would the elites attempt to fulfill the prophecies of a religion they do not believe in?

>>18744808
On your non-Christian countries point, I think Buddhism is a shrinking religion. Like in the West, I think people in East/Southeast Asia also increasingly believe less in or engage with Buddhist practice. The same could probably be said of more niche Eastern religions like Shinto.

>>18744782
>From an outside perspective the catholic church honestly seems a bit suspect, especially in recent times.
The catholic church is such a meme that, well, disregarding the fact that 99% of Christians do not actually believe in God, if you asked a Catholic, someone who just goes to church, if they agreed with the Protestant belief of transubstantiation (and explained them what it is) they'd say lol what which is absolutely kekworthy
if you asked them if they believe that the word of the Pope is as infallible as the word of God they'd laugh
basically they're only catholic because the catholic church has presence, they do not even understand their own church and why it is different from some other church or what it means to be christian
same shit probably in Murica where you have these aggressive Bible thumpers who are as un-Christian as it gets but they believe they are because they have a big black Bible at their bedside

>>18744784
It kind of is, the Pope goes along with their stuff like climate change and refugees

>>18744839
I don't see Hollywood constantly making fun of Buddhists.

>>18744853
I didn't say anything about Hollywood, nor about the way Buddhism is treated in the West. I was speaking specifically about the context of Southeast/East Asia.

My comment was prompted by this, is all:
>We cannot say if non-Christian countries are not experiencing the same opposition, but they would likely have different elites with a different modus operandi, anyway.

I'm not trying to argue with you.

>>18744835
>They don't care about people being proud of their history and culture as long as it doesn't imply Christian roots.

>Why all the satanic imagery then?
It could either disillusioned pawns (like those Church of Satan fake-Satanists, actually just angry atheists or dabblers) or it could be a play.

I'm not denying that your position is the truth, but I'm denying that we know what the truth of the matter is.

If they have great power, they can easily sneak in these "Satanic images" to validate the few "truthseekers" and lead them on false paths, addicting them to media (but not for conventional reasons, i.e., that they enjoy it, but rather to analyze and be outraged) and whistleblowing.

>I don't see Algerians, Indians or Thai people being the targets of such efforts.
You're none of those, most likely, so you wouldn't know. But alas, they do deracinate those countries that can best oppose them. What of the Chinese? Have they not been deracinated by the Communists? What of Japan? Have they not also been deracinated?

>No, I already have my answer, I'd like you to tell me what you think.
Of course you have an answer, but you believe that your answer is the truth, when you are still at the level of a question.

>coincidental
>do you seriously believe this
No, I am presenting alternative, possible hypotheses. Besides, your incredulity means nothing to me.

>Why would the elites attempt to fulfill the prophecies of a religion they do not believe in
If they are of (((pre-Christian sentiments))), they could believe that they need to fulfill the prophecies so the messiah comes to establish their dominion over the goyim (i.e., they have a different interpretation of the prophecies, an entirely different theology).

Or, as I already said, they could try to fulfill the prophecies, believing that nothing would happen as a result in order to "refute" Christianity. They only want to deconvert Christians so they can manipulate society into a different direction

>>18744853
No, that's the responsibility of the CCP and white monkey shills. Shit like this:

https://youtu.be/YkCLVsyg-Nc?t=396

But no, tell me more about how the atheistic Communist party actually desires for more people to become Buddhist. Or perhaps, they have infiltrated that religion as they did with Orthodoxy (though there was an "underground church"). You must know that once a religion is infiltrated, that infection never really withdraws.

>>18744416
Imagine only believing in a religion for purposes of waging the amerifat culture war on an anonymous coomalayan yak milking forum.

>>18744897
I see the arguments you raise and the thing that comes repeatedly to mind is occam's razor. Is it more likely that the elites try their best to fulfill prophecies because they believe they are the truth, or out of some twisted reasoning that makes them believe working towards the accomplishment of a prophecy is the best way to make people stop believing in it?
Is it more likely that those in the highest strata of society, that don't need to bother with such symbology, offer worship to Canaanite deities, wear pendants representing goat heads, and partake in all sorts of similar rituals because they are "disillusioned", are merely pretending, or are misleading people — or that they do these things because they actually believe they have a meaning and purpose?
If the shoe fits, it fits.
>>18744916
The CCP doesn't like religion as a whole, but it's not a concentrated effort to symbolically undermine Buddhism and to actually subvert and invert its values and make a mockery of them. It's just repression and suppression.

>always do the opposite of what our enemy says
You are still controlled by the enemy if he is shrewd enough to exploit your unequivocal, unthinking disbelief of him.

>>18744937
So what, we should submit to what is currently going on?

>>18744941
No, we simply shouldn't seek our validation from what is going on. If no one was fighting Christianity, find a way for it to be as true as if everyone despised it.

Though it is not difficult to despise a religion that seems to promote pacifism, possessing nothing, depersonalization, and not being an autonomous, thinking person. Compound all of its hypocrisies and condemnations of disproportionate suffering with that.

And yet I am a Christian, and have answers for all of these things. These are not answers that must be read in a book, but answers that must be arrived at through introspection and personal transformation. You will never convince a man through a syllogism unless you change the man.

>>18744928
>actually subvert and invert its values and make a mockery of them
Dunno I think creating a federally administered Buddhist supervisory organ and having it denounce the Dalai Lama and praise the government is pretty meddlesome. Of course, there has always been entanglement between Buddhism and the Chinese government, sometimes as a partner and sometimes as a persecutor, since long before communism, but never centralized and enforced to such a degree as it is now

>>18744937
Jews have hated Christ since the start

I think what tends to draw at least mildly intelligent people to Christianity is the meaningful coincidences surrounding it that make it hard to suspend your disbelief and say nothing happened. Which does not mean that the story happened like the Christians say it did, or that Jesus' teachings were what the Christians say they were, but there is definitely a mystery surrounding the life of Jesus, probably the greatest mystery in history, and I can understand why so many people feel drawn to it.

>>18745279
Which coincidences do you mean specifically?

>>18745279
people flock towards religion because the more they learn about the world, the more they realize how uncaring it is
having an all loving, caring presence that's always watching you is calming for these people who can't deal with the existential dread themselves.

>>18745308
I mean the general convergences of events that contributed to making Christianity the most successful religion of all time. Was it really a fluke, was Jesus just a deranged preacher who just happened to gain a large following thanks to a combination of charisma and luck? Were the events of the New Testament really just an invention from his followers, were the miracles just fabrications, were the martyrs just deluded madmen? Furthermore, there seems to me there is an impulse throughout the last two millennia that props up Christianity's spiritual strength, from events like in hoc signo vinces that suggest a kind of synchronicity, to a cultural influence that pervades the western mind to the point that even the most anti-Christian philosophers still operated within the Christian framework. I think Jung was right and that we are nearing the end of the Christian era now, although I disagree with his analysis regarding the antichrist, but the last 2000 years were definitely governed by the sign of the fish. What this implies for the future I'm not quite sure, but it is my opinion that whatever Christianity's shortcomings may have been, Jesus was not simply a failed apocalyptic preacher, and as distorted as the surrounding dogma and mythology has become as time went by, this initial mystery remains and is meaningful.

fuck boxes, I'm making a triangle.

>>18745378
Nice post thanks for the answer. So you are not sure yourself if he is really god, he may just be an avatar of a cycle or age?

>>18745509
I'm not a Christian by any stretch of the term, I don't think Jesus was God, but yes that sounds close enough. It seems likely to me that Jesus was the herald of a new age, and that his existence and message were meaningful for humanity within the confines of that age. Since I believe time is cyclical or undefinable rather than linear however, I don't agree with the Christian view that history is building up to Jesus' return or that the next age will be a "bad" one. The decadence we are seeing now could be happening because of the death of Christianity, which after 2000 years, at the end of the age of Pisces, has simply reached its end, and now the world has to move on. I don't know (and would like to figure out) what purpose this served in the grander scheme of things, and what moving on implies as far as the person and symbol of Christ are concerned, but I think it will be made clearer whenever the herald of Aquarius will appear, which if we're going by astrological timeframes shouldn't be too far off now, by the end of our lifetimes at most.

>>18744652
I disagree, I think society is, for the most part, moving in a positive direction in several key fields: people are becoming secular and more amoral, traditional norms are dissolving, and the structures that define and control us are slowly being eroded as individual agency becomes paramount. This is best demonstrated in the realm of sex, where almost every sort of taboo has been gradually eroded and society becomes more and more sexually permissive (to the degree that even matters of consent are getting sidestepped). The nation-state is eroding. The legitimacy of capital is disintegrating. Institutions are collapsing in real time. Deterritorialization is real, it's happening, and it's for the better.

>>18745605
>people are becoming secular and more amoral, traditional norms are dissolving
>every sort of taboo has been gradually eroded and society becomes more and more sexually permissive
Why is this good?

>>18745614
All signs point to a correction. What, you thought you could just accumulate forever with no burst?

>>18745634
What are you even talking about

>>18745635
>falling fertility
>overpopulation
>exhaustion of resources
>declining competency of leadership
>poor quality of cultural expression, mostly dedicated to either nostalgia or escapism
I don't mean this in a stupid tradlarp or a marxist contradictions of capital way, I mean the civilization is for lack of a better term spiritually exhausted and it could fall so quickly people will debate the causes for the next thousand years. You don't get your utopia. The human idea of utopia is to do nothing and laze about, which is a form of suicide. The closer we get to attaining this the more rotten things get. No one is responsible for anything, so when it happens we may be quite surprised at who puts things back together and how? From what margins will they arrive? Which nomad war machine will march on the center and take it? Who has enough vitality to be in charge?

>>18745584
Why do you think time is cyclical? (Feel free to ignore my questions if they are becoming annoying)

>>18745614
Because the ultimate purpose of existence imo is the fulfillment of the individual's desires- any institutional obstacle to that being eroded is for the better.

>>18745691
I think cyclical is a misleading term because it implies everything repeats over and over identically, but I don't know of a better qualifier. I think time as we perceive it is merely a projection of an ultimate reality in which our current frames of reference would be condensed in a single point. Therefore I have never seen time as particularly relevant, at least not in the sense that it would eventually lead to a kind of final conclusion as linear time would imply. Astrological cycles could seem to make time appear linear on a microcosmic scale as the paradigm they create (in Pisces, Christianity) provides a clear eschatology that might be adapted to the spiritual sensibilities and advancement of the people within that age. Which could imply that our being born during a shift of cycles is not meaningless.
So to answer your question less vaguely, absolute reality is not linear (which implies finitude) but infinite and contains this lower reality as a fixed "point". Small-scale cycles within that point provide a sense of linearity within an infinite timeline, which makes the idea of a linear overarching timeline beyond the cycles redundant and useless since the only way you could perceive anything beyond them would be by entering ultimate reality, and at this point you're beyond time anyway.

>>18730245
the gay science

>>18745786
Where do these ideas come from? I personally cannot quite shake the sort of Faustian or linear apocalyptic-tragic sense of time but I could not give any real reason for this.

>>18745891
>Where do these ideas come from
Couldn't say specifically, my worldview was shaped by what I read over the years and I made no conscious effort to map out what I believed.
This sense of time you refer to is not incompatible to what I am describing insofar as that is how individual cycles end, unless you're talking about an end of the world itself.
>real reason
You don't need one, beliefs don't always need to be formally justified

>>18745681
I just realized that my interest in Christianity comes from being on my deathbed. I just realized that I am scared of collapse and I need to find a meaning before my life is cut short.

>>18745981
Read Phaedo

>>18745371
Why would "dealing with the existential dread alone" be something admirable? It's like someone holding their hand over the fire and boasting that they can burn themselves, like an idiot. If your evolution gave us the desire for a personal deity, and we feel like neglected children without one, by all means, let us view that as the normal state of things.

>>18745981
Start with Nietzsche

Bump for a good thread

>>18745723
Read the Dhammapada

>>18745988
We evolved to be spiritual?

>>18746048
>>18745984
I'm trying the Tolstoj pill, if it doesn't work I'll dig up my Neetz books from high school and if it doesn't work I'll read Phaedo and if that doesn't work either I'll jump off a cliff

>>18749097
What are you reading by Tolstoy, his essay about religion?

>>18749106
Yeah. Confessions and now his essay on Life and Death.
I'll be honest, it's not very convincing in the aspect of faith although it's easy to be enamored with the concepts especially through disillusioned eyes of someone who's fed up with modernity and its dehumanizing, alienating nature.

>>18749152
Check out also his essay What I believe, that's the only one I really liked of his

>>18749165
I've been looking for it, that's the next one.