/lit/ - Literature

>>19206149
>Wojak faggotry
You deserve it

>>19206149
is this a hecking Kanye West reference? OOHHHHH MY CHRIST IM GAPING MY ASS

>>19206149
There's always been a population of them here, but I've noticed that Christianity threads/replies have increased tremendously lately. I kind of like it, but we should really just get a general going as a containment thread

>Buddhists and other Eastern fags say something vaguely relevant to a topic and tell you to read their books
>fine
>Christians do the same
>WTF, STOP LARPING CHRISTARD
yeah, okay
>>19206164
Terrible idea. It'd immediately devolve into Prots chimping out, Catholics seething in response, Orthodox being called larpers, and Gnostics doing their schizo thing. No one would actually want to post there
I don't understand why you people seethe so hard over someone bringing up their opinions unsolicited, when that's literally what everyone here does whenever a remotely open ended and philosophical question is asked. By that logic, we should just ban any threads not directly related to specific books/authors

>>19206191
Buddha wasn’t jewish

>>19206149
It's just the latest fad in online larping. It'll pass.

cope atheist nigger

>>19206208
So said the faggot that also though atheism would be around forever and grow to replace Christianity. How the fuck is that working out for you?

>>19206149
/lit/ is strictly nitwit - midwit central these days. The vast majority of posters haven't had an original idea in their entire lives, and since Christianity is the dominant cultural religion, they gravitate towards it because of the ambient influence that they "should" believe it, but because they have aspirations to higher thinking, they ape the process of reason to try and defend an abjectly unreasonable thing (faith) in a completely arbitrary religion (mostly based on geographical and cultural lines). It's pretty sad to be honest.

>>19206164
>I kind of like it
Why? It's completely destroyed a lot of threads which want to discuss something else. It's so fucking insufferable.
>>19206191
Yeah but typically Buddhists or Hindus don't go into threads that have nothing to do with their religion and completely derail the entire thread. With the notable exception of Guenonfag.

>>19206213
>cope atheist nigger

>>19206214
Is that a joke? Atheism is absolutely assraping the church right now.

>>19206214
Very well. Religion will be a joke in the US in a few decades just like it is now in Europe

>>19206191
There are no topics christers are relevant to except threads expressly about themselves and their authors. The dharmic religions have all sorts of theories about consciousness, phenomena, substance etc. much like the Greeks, the Germans, and the PoMos do, so you could bring them up in some sort of comparative philosophy discussion around different texts and ideas. But christers rely on miracles as the foundation of their entire worldview so there's nothing to discuss. They believe their miracle and then believe that because of this that makes everything else they believe true and everything else you say false, and you can end the conversation by saying "sorry I don't believe that." Then they either insult you or say they'll pray for you. To understand how this mosaic distinction originated, you should start with the Assmann, egyptologist Jan Assmann.

>>19206214
Christianity is in massive decline as both Islam and "No religion" are making massive gains. Time to jump ship Christcuck.

>>19206228
>>19206233
Seething minority. Christ is king

>>19206250
Christianity isn't white you moron

>>19206245
See
>>19206250

>>19206245
Atheists can't breed and rely on the deconversion of people of other faiths, and people are always walking out of both watered-down and raised-from-birth-fundamentalist faiths. It's reasonable to believe the future belongs to transhumanists vs religious fundamentalists with the moderate positions atrophied away

>>19206256
>Christianity isn't white you moron

>>19206250
Then why do trannies get library story hours but you can't have prayer in schools? Christianity got cucked hard by secularism

>>19206235
Your argument literally boils down to, I don't like it and it's bad, which can be said about anything and everything
>>19206220
>Yeah but typically Buddhists or Hindus don't go into threads that have nothing to do with their religion and completely derail the entire thread
I don't know man, I've seen it happen a few times, obviously less so than Christians, but that's just a numbers game. The principle is the same

>>19206260
If you have a child that you indoctrinate into your religion, your religion gains +1. If you deconvert someone, that religion gets -1 and "No religion" gets +1. So yes, if the deconvert rate is at lest half of the difference in birthrate, the religion in question will eventually cease to exist (theoretically).

>>19206250
Lmao. It's literally only blacks and Mexicans keeping religion alive in America. High IQ whites and asians are rapidly secularizing.

>>19206264
>Christianity got cucked hard by parasites that steal culture AKA "jews"
FTFY FAGGOT

>>19206260
Jews, Christians, and Muslims are the ones who can't breed and rely on their institutionalized religions to get spouses. All the modern day "atheist" incels were formerly Jewish / Christian / Muslim in their family trees.

>>19206270
>I don't like it and it's bad,
You better believe it. What I don't like is bad!

>>19206273
Probably different rates for different religions. In US for instance the Catholic church would be extinct in 20 years without immigration due to people deconverting atheism agnosticism secularism or switching to pentacostal or evangelical (or even orthodox)
>>19206285
No, religious people have higher fertility that's my point. Atheism doesn't give you a wife or a reason to have kids.

>>19206270
Nah

>>19206299
>religious people have higher fertility
Only thanks to those institutions. When those get removed from power, like what has slowly been happening in the West, those people turn into incels, because they're genetically weak. Incels are a phenomenon today because these religions allowed weak genes to propagate for millennia.

>>19206235
So I suppose that would discount Augustine, Aquinas, Duns Scotus, the Scholastics, Hegel, Schelling, Kierkegaard, Leibniz, Husserl, and the rest within and directed by Christian ideas? You're so obviously ignorant of the history of philosophy in the last two millennia to think so. In other words, an wikipedia skimming pseud.
>They believe their miracle and then believe that because of this that makes everything else they believe true and everything else you say false, and you can end the conversation by saying "sorry I don't believe that."
Go watch a William Lane Craig debate or any modern Christian philosopher discussion and see if that's how it goes. There are plenty of major philosophical issues that concern Christianity, as they concern Indian religions. The existence and character of God, of the soul, of matter and the mind, scepticism, fideism, epistemology, etc. Those would be things to discuss.
And it's ignorant to assume there are no philosophers remaining in a Christian tradition who disbelieve miracles, not that I condone them. But somehow, Dharmic or Buddhist thinkers magically get a pass from their own religious/cultural background according to pseuds like you.

>>19206299
Bro you don't need religion to want to have sex. Most pregnancies are "unplanned" at best and really they're just accidents. Do you think dogs and cats believe in Jesus?

>>19206299
>Atheism doesn't give you a wife or a reason to have kids.
Atheism is not a system of values, so obviously it wouldn't. Atheism is a position on a theological claim. Typically, atheists also have a secular value system which usually includes something like "the pursuit of happiness", which for most human beings includes reproducing and building a family. I think economic conditions are much more at fault for the trend in putting off of marriage/coupling and even once married/coupled, the putting off of children. Kids cost a boat load of money, or an inclination to be utterly irresponsible.

>>19206149
Religion has always preyed on the low hanging fruit.

You might enjoy reading up on platitudes, banal statements, & thought terminating cliches - it is extremely easy to manipulate these people.

>>19206344
Oh my Christ and you were being serious too. I bet your balls that you have dawkins on your shelf too faggot

>>19206263
Yeah, it isn't.

>>19206327
>Bro you don't need religion to want to have sex. Most pregnancies are "unplanned" at best and really they're just accidents. Do you think dogs and cats believe in Jesus?
It's based on actual fertility rates. Atheists are near extinction replacement rates. Religious people reproduce near or above replacement. "Nones" are below replacement.

>>19206344
Name three primary historical sources you've read from before 1600 concerning this issue.

>>19206351
It's a good read, desu

>>19206351
>ad hom
Oh the ironing

>>19206355
Then how has the non-religious part of the population grown so rapidly over the past years? It's almost like some of those religious kids aren't so religious when they grow up.

>>19206355
Isn't it sad to just assume every baby born to a religion just becomes that religion? Like, where is the human agency? Shit, I guess determinism is true.

>>19206355
You are an incel protected by a menacing group of people who seek to destroy beauty just so their repulsive genes can survive.

>>19206360
Why would I need to cite a source? Are you fluent in the English language?

It's empty language, it's fluff, or with metaphors woven in.

Take a look at how cults manipulate people with language. What's your opinion on that?
What about most people generally being impressionable?

>>19206375
Nice projection faggot. We're talking about reality, here, not your gay fantasy world of wants and desires.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/gods-little-rabbits-religious-people-out-reproduce-secular-ones-by-a-landslide/
>In other words, it’s not just that "educated" or "upper class" people have fewer children and tend also to be less religious, but even when you control for such things statistically, religiosity independently predicts number of offspring born to mothers. Even flailing religious denominations placing their emphasis on converting outsiders, such as Yehova’s witnesses, are out-reproducing nonreligious mothers. Hindus (2.79 births per woman), Muslims (2.44), and Jews (2.06), meanwhile, are prolific producers of human beings. Nonreligious Swiss mothers bear a measly 1.11 children.
>>19206374
>sad
It's statistically reliable that irreligious people reproduce less, as a group. Even if later generations of religious secularize, this reliably remains as a predictor. Individual case studies don't mean much. That is, even if people secularize, those who don't and those convert reliably reproduce more. And: a good predictor of your own "worldview" is that of your parents.
It's a similar principle to the equilibrium of dominant/recessive genes, which are mathematically proven to meet equilibrium provided certain conditions met. Except in this case, the irreligious countries are getting huge migrations from religious ones.

>>19206404
>It's empty language, it's fluff, or with metaphors woven in.
Yes, that describes your posts quite adequately.
I'm not asking you to cite a source for claims, dumbass. Do you know how to read? I'm asking you to demonstrate you've personally done any substantial and personal research to make such a broad and generalizing statement.

>>19206419
>We're talking about reality, here, not your gay fantasy world
Your reality is constructed by old, shitty books written by genetically weak Jews / low IQ Romans / Arabs who hate this life because it hates them and want to diminish it. You are an incel protected by these ugly-ass, retarded freaks. Without them, you'd die off like nature originally intended.

>>19206149
>Post a thread about paganism
the topic will almost always involve Christianity as most pagan topics of interest had a relationship with that particular sect historically.
>Post thread about philosophy
Most major branches of western philosophy have either been influenced or influenced it.
>Post something about history
religion was a big part of daily life in most of europe both publicly and privately and thus european stuff tends to both directly and indirectly connect to the topic. And european stuff is kinda world influencing.

Yah anon, Its out of the blue, its not that its a massively important, influential, and multifaceted topic. And Its not like someone well read would have ever come across a christian text. Even putting aside larpers which there definitely are, dont pretend like its unwarrented

>>19206149
>>19206153
>>19206159
>>19206164
>>19206191
>>19206197
>>19206208
>>19206208
>>19206213
>>19206214
>>19206215
>>19206220
>>19206221
>>19206228
>>19206233
>>19206235
>>19206245
>>19206250
>>19206256
>>19206260
>>19206351
>>19206404
>>19206419
>>19206263

>>19206313
Yes I have read Nietzsche
>>19206324
>trying to take credit for Hegel
Ooof he was a Spinozist try again. You're not supposed to being doing pantheism; if you are you're doing the whole Christianity bit wrong.
>>19206327
As far as I know, cats and dogs have not developed as social animals with religious beliefs used to impose moralities and dictate and inform them of ideal family formations, sexual orientations, attitudes towards contraception/abortion etc.
>>19206338
Yes the absurdly rising opportunity costs for "middle class" people to have children are definitely impacting fertility in ways that are meaningless to the poorer, the richer, and religious, who could be rich or poor for that matter
>>19206371
Deconversion
>>19206374
It's one of the few unchallenged bigotries

>>19206448
You know well they bombard the thread with their hysterical, asinine, womanly histrionics. They are more often than not moralpolicing here instead of engaging rationally. They blaspheme Gods but get butthurt when others retaliate by calling their Lord a dead rabbi. Drop the pretense of being a rational debater here already.

Most Atheists are still Christian — Their logic is Christian, their general ignorance of the wider world is Christian, and their 'infallible' haughtiness is *distinctly* Christian.

I would love to listen to an Atheist who originated from an Eastern Religion instead of this Crypto Papist-Protestantic sham currently infecting this thread.

>>19206441
Can you gaytheists not commit constant goalpost moving? We're talking about statistical facts regarding fertility, and you want to make an emotional diatribe completely empty of any rational faculties, and on a completely different subject.
No, calling things bad names does not rebut them, nor does it make you a deep thinker. It shows you're behaving like a hysterical woman on her period who can only communicate what emotions she's feeling.

>>19206448
>Its not like someone well read would have ever come across a christian text
Yet christers seem to think the rest of us have never read the Bible, and when they are challenged on something about the religion, they cite the Bible, as if that answers a critique of a religion based on the Bible. Yes I know it says you're right and I'm wrong and that some dude saw Jesus say something.

>>19206448
Except as in the OP, these faggots even come into threads about Hinduism which has nothing to do with christianity and they ruin the whole thing discussing demons.

>>19206419
>a good predictor of your own "worldview" is that of your parents
Almost like it is predetermined by factors outside your control and arrogate data supports this?

>>19206487
Don't forget about the epistemological weight of miracles!

>>19206456
>Ooof he was a Spinozist try again. You're not supposed to being doing pantheism;
Hegel openly called himself an orthodox Lutheran.
And yeah, don't bother dealing with the numerous other major thinkers like Kierkegaard or Augustine (quoted by Schelling).

>religious birthrates will mean atheists are going extinct!!!
Uh dude, secularism is structurally hegemonic in society. Religion requires tight-knit communities enforcing regular observance to perpetuate itself, and these communities are being regularly dissolved in the pressures of modernity. You can be an evangelical who has 5 kids but what's going to happen when they go to to university? Or get a job in the next city over? Or marry someone with different beliefs? Some will maintain and rebuild their membership in a local faith community, some won't. And even the ones who retain their faith will have some whose commitment to it wanes such that their children will be more likely to secularize.
There are some groups like Mormons that are good at dealing with this, because they're a cult-like organisation. Muslims and Orthodox Jews to some extent too because they're conscious ethnic minorities who know they need in-group cohesion to survive. But not most Christians and especially not Catholicism that is hemorrhaging believers everywhere except in Africa.

>>19206419
>a good predictor of your own "worldview" is that of your parents
Almost like it is predetermined by factors outside your control and aggregate data supports this?

>>19206491
There's a different between case studies and sets of data.
A person's parents don't determine their worldview strictly. There is no sense in saying someone individually is an atheist because where they live or a Christian because of their parents. But, as part of a data set, it's a predictor. And things like culture or nationality in tandem with parents are a strong predictor.

>>19206496
Christian theologians believe there is a big choo choo in the sky that choo choos all by itself. Truly profound. Hegel was shitposting if he said he was an orthodox Lutheran.

>>19206149
>Hinduism thread got completely derailed by retards debating whether they were demons
Extremely based.

>>19206520
It isn't based, you guys look like 60 year old morons.

>>19206519
>Christian theologians believe there is a big choo choo in the sky that choo choos all by itself.

>>19206478
You're a retard who doesn't understand that incels today were formerly Jewish / Christian / Muslim. It's not atheism or even secularism that is to blame, but your precious religions that are, since it's them that allowed these ugly, retarded families to survive for as long as they have. Modern "atheists" were people formerly protected by these shitty religions (and they clearly aren't even atheists since they believe in the gospel of science). You think you're getting one over on atheism by pointing out that modern "atheists" breed less, when all you're really doing is exposing how your religions made by disgusting freaks has allowed genetic failures to outlast their expiration date, leaving them hopeless, miserable incels once these institutions fall by the wayside.

>>19206462
>>19206481
>>19206487
yes, and that all applies to when we get the occasional wave of pagans going into christian threads too, or when a geunonfag goes into a Buddhist thread.

Are all of you new here? There are retards of every stripe.

>>19206520
That's a very strong jawline on that rebbe. Don't they usually cover that with an enormous beard?

>>19206528
The problem is you christcucks have been ganging up and doing that everywhere. Stop.

>>19206529
Chad just got ordained as a bishop from seminary at 18yo, the beard didn't have time to grow.

>>19206524
THEY'RE TWO THEY'RE FOUR THEY'RE SIX THEY'RE EIGHT SHUNTING TRUCKS AND HAULING FREIGHT

>>19206503
>Uh dude, secularism is structurally hegemonic in society. Religion requires tight-knit communities enforcing regular observance to perpetuate itself, and these communities are being regularly dissolved in the pressures of modernity.
So is there at least an admission that it's the current cultural wants of a hyper-modern capitalist society that drives irreligion more than anything else? At least, that the vast majority of people do not come to their worldview, regardless of what it is, based on strong personal engagements, arguments, experiences, or reasons, but societal expectations. Which is fair enough, but if it's true for religious societies, then it's also true for irreligious ones.
>religious birthrates will mean atheists are going extinct!!!
That's quite an extreme version of the actual claim. But religion is not going extinct, either.

>>19206542
>THEY'RE TWO THEY'RE FOUR THEY'RE SIX THEY'RE EIGHT SHUNTING TRUCKS AND HAULING FREIGHT