/lit/ - Literature

>>19791810
It's complicated for people to put themsleves in the shoes of the late-classical period, especially since a lot of stuff that went on (for example, a plague which wiped out 25% of the Roman Empire's population) isn't even well-known. Nor the response of the various groups to all the happenings, be they Christian or pagan.

>>19791810
>During his reign, mathematics, astronomy, and theology reached their highest level among the Ottomans. His social circle included a number of humanists and sages such as Ciriaco de' Pizzicolli of Ancona, Benedetto Dei of Florence and Michael Critobulus of Imbros, who mentions Mehmed as a Philhellene thanks to his interest in Grecian antiquities and relics. It was on his orders that the Parthenon and other Athenian monuments were spared destruction. Besides, Mehmed II himself was a poet writing under the name "Avni" (the helper, the helpful one) and he left a classical diwan poetry collection.
embrace islam, brother

>>19791810
It was the Greek-speaking Christian communities of the levant who preserved and passed down the ancient classics (ignore the NPC Islamophile narrative that gets pushed so hard these days).

The early Christian church was in many ways a spiritual fruition of the Mediterranean civilisation (at that time controlled from Rome): a synthesis of scriptural monotheism (drawn from the various religious traditions of Mesopotamia, themselves ultimately founded on proto-Indo-European dualistic cosmologies, specifically Zoroastrianism), and paganism (with its sacrificial rites, platonic ontology, multitude of deities (whose identities were merged with that of the saints), mother goddesses (whose rites formed the basis of the cult of Mary), and divine son/sun who died on the (solar) cross).

How do i start with the church fathers? Is there any book that puts them into dialogue with the philosophical tradition?

>>19791810
Actually they were the preservers and copyists of those texts when everyone else was too busy trying to rape each other

>>19792040
The Origins of the Christian Mystical Tradition

>>19792040
Start with St. Augustine, Athanasius, Joyn Chrysostom. These three are part of the 8 conventionally accept Great Church Fathers.
I reccomend you also read The Saying of the Desert Fathers, St Maximus the Confessor and Isaac the Syrian.
Im Orthodox Christian (from birth, Im a Balkaner), so naturally I know less about the Latin Fathers.
Also, unlike the Catholics, we dont have a set list of Fathers and we dont believe that the Patristic age has even come to an end, if in the 21st century some genius theologian appears he might come to be considered a Father.

>>19791890
>parentheses within parentheses within parentheses
This is what they call 4d chess.

>>19792040
read the philokalia

why is there no byzantine greek and latin reading chart?

>>19791870
The Ottomans failed to invent anything themselves.

>>19792124
they weren't individualists like westerners, no need to "invent", what matters is to put things in order and have a superior society, "originality" is for faggots who want to affirm themselves

>>19792139
Cope. Your empire died in ignominy as the sick man of Europe, and now your people are starving thanks to the idiotic policies of an Islamicist watermelon salesman.

>>19791810
Most of Church Fathers were well-born from upper class families and received classical education. Also this >>19792074

>>19792155
The fact that the ottoman empire (last caliphate) died, is a clear sign that we live the end times.
>your people are starving thanks to the idiotic policies of an Islamicist watermelon salesman
there is no such thing as "your people", ottomans are not an ethnicity but the citizens of the earthly knigdom of Allah - the caliphate

>>19791890
>divine son/sun who died on the (solar) cross
Yes yes your pun that only works in Germanic languages was essential to the early development of the cult of Judeo-Dionysos

>>19792119
There is very little Byzantine literature that survived the sackings. Most of it is theology and history related stuff. I recommend you look up Digenes Akritas. I think it's the only epic that survived. If you are into law for some reason you can also look up Codex Justinianus/Corpus Iuris Civilis. It's basicaly the foundation of all European law.

>>19791890
>The early Christian church was in many ways a spiritual fruition of the Mediterranean civilisation (at that time controlled from Rome): a synthesis of scriptural monotheism (drawn from the various religious traditions of Mesopotamia, themselves ultimately founded on proto-Indo-European dualistic cosmologies, specifically Zoroastrianism), and paganism (with its sacrificial rites, platonic ontology, multitude of deities (whose identities were merged with that of the saints), mother goddesses (whose rites formed the basis of the cult of Mary), and divine son/sun who died on the (solar) cross).
Another Zeitgeits movie memer. You are partly correct and partly retarded. Seethe and dilate.

>>19792088
With Fathers we mean the Early Church Fathers in history up until the 5th century. This is a categorization and elevates them because they are closer to Christian times than any other Father after them. Similar like the age of the Patriarchs of the Old Testament, which starts from Noah and ends with Jacob. We still call our priests "father" or "pater". If a genius theologian comes we refer to him as Doctor of the Church.

>>19792192
le browncel living in europe larping on 4chan

>>19792192

>>19792092
Not my fault you're a midwit and can't hold multiple ideas in your head at the same time. There are actually only parentheses within parentheses.

>>19792288
The homophone is fortuitous and does not undergird the logic of identifying existing spiritual narratives and seeing the ways in which they are replicated in emerging christology (although the words are derived from the proto-indo-european 'sā' and 'su').

>>19792514
I'm not denying Jesus' existence, dumbass. There's plenty of good scholarship identifying the Platonist roots of the Church Fathers' philosophy, and the borrowing of pre-Christian rituals and outward forms in the early church (e.g. black cassocks and white surpluses from the Cult of Isis).

>>19792659
I agree with your points, but surplus should be surplice.

>>19792695
Ah. Yes. Well we all need editors.

>>19792074
*censors and rapers of the texts

>>19792732
Muslims, Gnostics, larpagans all say that, yet they have zero alternative manuscripts to prove their point.

>>19791810


YOU ARE IGNORANT & IDIOTIC.


>>>/pol/

>>>/trash/

>>>/r/eddit

>>19792744
Because all that survived was edited by christers. It's like when a butchered translation of some classic text is put out by a university press whose translator hates the culture that produced the work. Imagine if that were the only version that survives 1000 years from now.

>>19792864
If all that survived has been edited by Christians, then how do you know they changed it?

>>19792879
Because you can compare different surviving versions

>>19791810
Some bishops and political leaders certainly fit this description, including a small set of the Church Fathers, but many of the most revered ones, esp. in the East—like Origen, the Cappadocians, Irenaeus, Polycarp, Hippolytus, etc.—were the font of a tradition which preserved ancient Greek literary culture into later history, in tandem with the Greek and Syriac monastic and church traditions mentioned above. I think Hippolytus understood Empedocles better than Aristotle, that Gregory of Nyssa drew out the conclusions of Platonism better than his predecessors, etc.

>>19792864
>Because all that survived was edited by christers
This isn't the case with Plato, as the originals come to us via the last Platonic polytheist, Gemistus Pletho. We know he gave us correct copies because his versions matched the quotations made by Latin authors in Greek, which as such could not have been edited by the Christian copyists in the West (you know "it's all Greek to me"? It comes from the phrase "Graecis est no legare possum", meaning "it is Greek; it cannot be read").

So when the West got Plato back, there was a huge scandal between the two factions of translators, one half wanting to censor it and do what Augustine wanted (where you just rewrite it all so that there is no Plato or Socrates and it's all Christian), and the other half arguing that a text should stand on its own and not be edited. I guess you could argue that the textual-purists were actually lying, but again, the texts that they were working from (in Greek) match the quotes, so you'd have to go line-by-line to argue against them.

>>19792906
Less edited than the Western versions, but to prove the are original would be rather difficult. In any case you had cases of both editing and just a failure to make new manuscripts that has resulted in the loss of a great deal of classical literature and philosophy. Scrubbed palimpsets too.

>>19792930
Sure, Gemistus Pletho could have subjected them to his own weird internal editing (his Platonic schema was radically different from what we normally think of as "Greek Mythology") but my point is that we do actually have knowledge about periods before our own. Not nearly as much as we'd like, but we do.

>>19792906
Interesting.

>>19792930
Censorship is a shame. Nonetheless, if it happened, then it had to happen.

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.

History is brutal and the loss of ancient culture is hardly the worst crime committed in the name of Christ. But the purity of his message and the sanctity of those who carried his name within their souls in those early days when the fate of the world hung in the balance is testament to the extraordinary power, and the unique status of that message, spoken by the lips of man but created in the mind of God.

>>19791810
I used to feel this way myself, but now I can relate more to the church fathers than the pagans. From our perspective it's easy to conflate the earlier achievements of Classical civilization with the period the early Christians were living through, but for them the reality on the ground was very different. It would be like comparing the progressive reforms of Victorian England to the "progressive" reforms of present day bongland, or the republican ideals of the American founding fathers to the current electoral practices of the USA.
When you live in a very corrupt and dying empire, it's only natural to revel in its decline. Imagine if, for example, some highly moralistic religious movement became powerful enough to take control of Anglosphere politics today. Imagine if they nationalized the banks, broke up the media, did away with the Washington Consensus, ended free trade, closed borders, outlawed identity politics, declared Antifa and LGBT terrorist organizations, revoked women's suffrage, and instituted a protectionist patriarchal theocracy.
Sure, the people who benefit from the current system would be upset, and ideological people would cry over the loss of their idols. Yes, there would also be some loss to GDP. We wouldn't have as many video games, plush toys and Star Wars figurines. For most people, however, it would represent a fresh start at civilization building. In 2000 years from now people would be living in luxury again and reading histories of our time. They would wonder why we gave up Western civilization so easily, not realizing how shit it actually was toward the end.

>>19792958
I don't agree with your religion so I will remember your fatalism regarding what it replaced fondly as your religion is replaced by Pride and Islam.

>>19792971
>When you live in a very corrupt and dying empire, it's only natural to revel in its decline. Imagine if, for example, some highly moralistic religious movement became powerful enough to take control of Anglosphere politics today. Imagine if they nationalized the banks, broke up the media, did away with the Washington Consensus, ended free trade, closed borders, outlawed identity politics, declared Antifa and LGBT terrorist organizations, revoked women's suffrage, and instituted a protectionist patriarchal theocracy.

Big brain post.

However, it's worth also remembering that for those Church Fathers who lived during and after the reign of Constantine, the Empire of Christ was seen as entirely continuous with ancient Rome (to the extant that Byzantines called themselves 'Romani', while for the Latin Church the identification is even more explicit).

It's as if your new moralistic movement, while burning away the liberal excesses of the previous era, still filled their works with references (admittedly altered and misquoted) to the founding fathers, called their new autocratic state-head 'president', and kept 'republic' and 'democracy' in the lexicon of their self-justifying statehood.

>>19792946
>Not nearly as much as we'd like
That's the heart of the matter yes. We'd have more if there hadn't been a cultural revolution, but since there was, there was. People arguing this cultural revolution deserves credit for saving the texts are profoundly dense. Like being proud of yourself for doing something ordinary.

>>19792975
That's fair enough.

I think that Christianity has weathered stronger storms than this, and that no matter how small the number of believers becomes, faith in Christ will still be carried in the hearts of those scattered few, the apostolic succession will be maintained, the eucharist will continue to be held, and the Mormons and Amish will use their power and numbers to maintain North America, the Korean people, suffused with the protestant spirit, will achieve their greater Korea and withstand the atheistic horde, and the Hebrews will expand beyond the Galilee and rip their Greater Israel from the heart of Islam, and history will continue.

But it's a matter of faith, of course. The fatalism is more an approach to theodicy than anything else.

>>19793005
You should read Pavane.

>>19793028
>the Mormons and Amish will use their power and numbers to maintain North America
Incredibly delusional view of how things work. Second generatiom Indian or Chinese immigrants have more "power" than the Amish have managed to come up with in 200 years, and the Mormons are a few election cycles away from losing control of Utah to secular liberals.

>>19793005
You also ignore the point about the Greco-Roman (more generally Mediterranean), wider European, and even Germanic pagan elements in Christianity, which have, I think, been instrumental to its success. This is something Chesterton talks about in Orthodoxy -- the way that Christianity is so thoroughly European. Paradoxically, it's neither explicit nor internal, but implicit and external. The forms and rituals and deities transmogrified and sanctified within the new spirit-structure built up by those very Fathers were thus perpetuated and maintained: the culture was neither abolished nor destroyed, but renewed in an awesome and empowered form -- it was Chistianity, not the cult of Zeus, that was the incubator for the revolutions, both scientific and democratic, of the last 500 years, because of which the Indo-European languages are now spoken in every city of the world, while European boots have printed the snows of Everest, and the Arctic and Antarctic poles, and remain even now, undisturbed by rain or wind, in the dust of the moon itself.

>>19793081
I don't want to sound like a Marxist but the objective conditions (economic, ecological, etc) are not static. Amish don't have power because they don't yet need it -- they are not under threat, and their numbers are not yet large enough that they need to organise and engage.

Mormons may lose control if things remain the same -- but they won't.

>>19792886
By copyist it means it was copied, literally. Do you know how was the procedure of copying the texts? Some copies of Old and New Testaments were done by illiterate people precisely to avoid any error of interpretation (sometimes errors and ''editions'' are because the copyist couldn't read the original text due to some natural obstruction on the material of the texts). But can you present a few cases on which this accusation stands? You know interpolations are verifiable, right?

>This isn't the case with Plato, as the originals come to us via the last Platonic polytheist, Gemistus Pletho.
Not all. Translations were done in late antiquity (Calcidius, Boethius), but also in the middle ages (Aristippus, for example). So a few dialogues were already available from these translations and commentaries.

>>19793089
>You also ignore the point about the Greco-Roman (more generally Mediterranean), wider European, and even Germanic pagan elements in Christianity, which have, I think, been instrumental to its success.
Can you tell me how Christianity has Germanic influence if the religion emerged before any contact with Germanic people? I think you mean Christianity had common elements with Germanic paganism just like it had with Platonism, which is completely different from saying Christianity has Germanic pagan elements, as if it was born out of some kind of synthesis.

>>19793089
Don't really care about the imperialism argument since I don't share your video game based values, but it's funny you mention the... paganized... aspect of the more medieval European Christianity, which comes after it destroys the outward signs of Hellenism. That is the opinion of Freud as well in Moses and Monotheism: Christianity, having developed from Judaism, is a replay of the resurgence of the priests of Ammon against the priests of Aten, if you know your Egyptian history. Or as the Muslims sometimes call Christianity, polytheism

>>19793098
I can't be bothered, but it's common knowledge that the only textual sources for Norse or Irish mythology are Christian scribes and that they did not xerox the stuff. Greater care was given to at least some Greek and Roman literature, but not the care it would have received from people who believed it

>>19793130
Ah, well there I'm partly alluding to Christianity in Germanic nations taking on Germanic rituals and traditions (Christmas wreaths and trees, eggs at Easter, etc) -- but symbols like the solar cross, and the man hung on the tree (it's interesting and somewhat strange that many of the Church fathers use that specific wording) have Germanic correlates (although it would be difficult to prove descent).

I think it's more that Christianity has an undeniable resonance with pagan belief systems, which was why all the leaders of those germanic, slavic, and celtic peoples willingly converted (Christianity in that first millennium was spread not by conquest but by missionaries and martyrs) -- and as a believer, I see that resonance as being an actual psychic connection between the historical crucifixion and the belief systems that predated it.

>>19793148
What's a video game based value?

I can't bear Freud, but yes, there are many psychic correlates and historic events repeated in Christianity. You can either interpret that as evidence for its artificiality (and inferiority to Hellenism or whatever it is you value) -- or you can see it as the aforementioned resonance.

>>19793168
So you have no evidence about what you claim and can't address the procedures of how copyists did their work and all, the recognition of these ancient texts as... you know... texts without interpolations, etc.

>but not the care it would have received from people who believed it
So we can have absolutely no reliable source for almost anything. Why bother with any Sumerian, gnostic, arian text? Why bother with any translation at all? I don't doubt you are loyal to your word and refuse to read any ancient text translated into whatever modern laguange you speak, seeing how dumb you are.

>>19793148
But yes: Christianity retains inward Hellenism (platonism/neoplatonism); rituals and language of Rome (themselves heavily Hellenic); Hebrew Scriptures (written in Greek by Hellenised Jews, and themselves based on wider Mediterranean and Persian spiritual traditions (ultimately stemming from Indo-European comology)); and combines it with pagan symbols, rituals, and polytheism.

Syncretic, synthetic, amorphous yet still rigidly contained within a creed composed by zealous and dogmatic Fathers, empowered and resonant, attractive and, yes, divine: Mere Christianity.

>>19793209
>What's a video game based value?
It's "look at how much of the map we painted in after adopting Christianity." It means you place little value on religion except as policy lever or social technology. A spiritual materialism if you will.

>>19793221
>So we can have absolutely no reliable source for almost anything
Correct, it's turtles all the way down. Thanks for playing

>>19793236
Ah, I see. Well it's certainly a source of pride. I am a European after all.

>>19793231
>written in Greek by Hellenised Jews
This is related to my argument with the other guy actually about Christians vs pre-Christians... those hellenized Judaeans did such a poor job preserving the religion under Greek rule that it became Christianity!

>>19793245
Are you really? You're sure you're not just an amerimutt admiring anglo authors like Chesterton praising Orthodoxy?

>>19793168
Dude, you are literally saying that if the copyists believed what they were copying they would.. copy better or what? Lol. See what was said >>19793098, the people copying both christian and pagan texts were the same, sometimes illiterate to avoid mistakes.

>>19793240
Ok you don’t read books, I got it. But I’m curious, who told you about the things you believe? Where did these people get their knowledge from? What about the people from where these other people got knowledge?

>>19793258
You're an ESL, huh.

>>19793001
>still filled their works with references (admittedly altered and misquoted) to the founding fathers, called their new autocratic state-head 'president', and kept 'republic' and 'democracy' in the lexicon of their self-justifying statehood
I'm sure they will. Just like the Caesars came up with "Imperator" or "Pater Patria" to avoid calling themselves kings. There will probably even be some lip service to "liberal democracy" or "free press", albeit as institutions now controlled by a central authority.
>those Church Fathers who lived during and after the reign of Constantine, the Empire of Christ was seen as entirely continuous with ancient Rome
Thanks anon. You put a smile on my face imagining the future popes and warlords calling themselves princes of America, or something similar.

>>19793271
>muh first cause
Oh if you've found it and can demonstrate it, do let me know. I've never argued for incorrupt texts conveying the ultimate truth, just that being in the hands of hostile intermediaries is a bit of a problem in terms of provenance.

>>19793276
Europeans from Europe are more likely to have a country they are from, simple as. You're probably, what, a third Irish, maybe some Scottish and German, could be half Italian or Polish? Who really knows? Where was my great great grandma from again, was it Russia or Ukraine? Oh they were the same country in 1890 that's right.

>>19793282
Well, it's hypothetical.

Certainly if some moralistic evangelical protestant fundamentalists seized control of the United States I'd be sad to see that country go.

>>19793302
My point is that if you were a native English speaker, you would realise that I'm not American, because of the way I write. The spelling, for one thing.

>>19793305
Their ban on abortion would make them a minority in 30 years.

>>19793309
The only example from your (presumable) last few posts is realise vs realize, which has come after the fact anyway.

>>19793326
Well, again, you'd be able to tell from sentence structure, were you a native speaker. It's hardly worth arguing with you about it.

>>19793312
It's dumb how modern Prots are obsessed with abortion now even though decades ago none of them cared. Abortion was almost entirely a Catholic issue, Protestant churches may have been against it morally but didn't care about fighting it in the courts or law. It almost seems like a distraction, keep religious people focused on muh black babies instead of other issues.

>>19791810

The entire Jewish species are spiteful mutants

>>19793375
Demiurge is cucked.

>>19793292
>first cause Oh if you've found it and can demonstrate it, do let me know
what the fuck are you on about?

> I've never argued for incorrupt texts conveying the ultimate truth, just that being in the hands of hostile intermediaries is a bit of a problem in terms of provenance.
But how do you know where everything you believe comes from? Why do you think modern scholars, publishers would be reliable intermediaries both about paganism and christianity?

>>19793292
see how the neopagan operates. exactly how modern sjws, woke, blm, feminists, identitarians do. in order to speak, know anything about, fucking COPY a text, you need place of speech. everything you apply to ancient christians can be applied to ancient pagans (they invented things, lied, resorted to physical force for lack of arguments).
be honest with everyone here and mainly to yourself and at least just say you don't like christianity and that is why you'll never touch anything related to it. you don't need to make up retarded shit in order to justify yourself.

>>19793334
>were you a native speaker
No not a native speaker of British English. And yet you are? But prefer to identify as European? So are you the UK version of a mutt? A Boris Johnson perhaps? Mum's from Lithuania, Dad's from one of the sub-nationalities?

>>19793388
You're taking issue with my issue of knowledge having to pass through multiple hands? That's my point, the hands it passes through matters since there is no untouched knowledge (unless you want to escalate to a discussion of mysticism).
>>19793405
What's the matter, can't handle being treated like a co-equal with all the other -ism's? There's no special authority you can appeal to to pull your words out of their context, he died some time ago.

>>19791870
The highest peak of the Ottomans was still not very high. Look at objective metrics and in 1500 years all of the world of Islam has accomplished almost nothing of value to humanity. It's absolutely pathetic, especially when you consider they're the inheritors of culture and land from previously great ancient empires like the Persians, Egyptians and Mesopotamians. The Middle East went from being the Jewel of civilization, with it's inhabitants being amongst the wealthiest and most cultured in the world to being a perpetually war torn, impoverished shit hole and it's all thanks to Islam itself. Now men from these regions are lazy as fuck, extremely impoverished, treat their women and families like shit, mass gang rape in public, etc, etc. The Islamic world is a disgrace.

>>19793434
You are barely in touch with what is being discussed, all the time making irrelevant, nonsensical correlations (first cause, mysticism).
> there is no untouched knowledge
If by untouched you mean what you were claiming, distorting editions, interpolations, all of which are easily detected, then you are wrong and there is loyal stuff to the originals. If you imply all the subtle issues of translations, then yes, there will never be a 100% rendering. But then this has nothing to do with Christianity (you know, they spoke the same language as Greeks and Romans), and I'll ask you to leave the thread for another thing is being discussed here.

>>19792864
And why didn't these pagans write and preserve their own copies then? Too busy buggering little boys?

>>19793452
>there is loyal stuff to the originals
Can't know this absolutely
>if you imply all the subtle issues of translations, then yes, there will never be a 100% rendering.
Exactly
>But then this has nothing to do with Christianity
They had no reason to save texts that they believed were literally evil, the ones they spared and copied are all we have left, as you say they couldn't even read these, how much more dangerous to the texts was it to be in the hands of someone who could edit them?
>(you know, they spoke the same language as Greeks and Romans)
Those are two languages, and moreover Christianity has a long long long long long long long history of bickering over translation issues and valuing a pedantic adherence to the most humble letter or syllable. (After all, wouldn't want to botch the literal contract you have with God). The Bible languaged hopped like three times over to get into church Latin. If there is an ur-text we don't have it. There's just fingers-crossed at the end of the day underneath whatever scholarly consensus

>>19793457
Have you heard about the Pope Emeritus lately?

>>19791870
pretty sure he had christian theological leanings

>>19793457
>And why didn't these pagans write and preserve their own copies then?
They did, it's why we have Plato.

We can take this a step further and point out that because by "Pagan" you mean "White", and by your own admission that Whites preserving White literature is in fact an act of racism, which is a sin, all acts of Whites preserving White literature and thinking, no matter their ideology or reasons for doing so, is in fact, Whites preserving White literature.

>>19792864
But you're just assuming that they butchered the text. you have to provide textual evidence for that claim faggot

>>19792385
who did it and why do i byzantine style desperately want an iliad 2 electric boogaloo

>>19793539
They defaced the statues. Razed the temples. Banned the rites. Persecuted the practitioners. And that's before we get to the period where all that survives are just texts which were valued as looted treasures from gentiles. Then when you run out of parchment you start erasing these to make more copies of books of the Bible, patristic literature, etc. You know they made an edit here or an omission there. I don't need to provide you with some JSTOR article

>>19793483
>Can't know this absolutely
We can with the technology available for, I don't know, some 50 years?
>Exactly
But then this was not the point of any of your posts.
>They had no reason to save texts that they believed were literally evil
Most of christian theologians and scholars received classical education, admitted to liking and recognizing the importance of many of pagan philosophy and literature, and many of them employ pagan texts in order to show similarities, where Christianity is superior, etc.
>the ones they spared and copied are all we have left
Wrong. We have some platonic dialogues, for example, that these ancient and medieval christians had no access, same for gnostic texts, and many other shit.
>as you say they couldn't even read these
What? Where did I affirm this? I literally said their language was latin and greek.
>how much more dangerous to the texts was it to be in the hands of someone who could edit them?
Copyist literally means copying. But yeah, they could simply destroy all pagan history and claim everything was invented by Christianity and Christianity is five millenia old. Again, we have scientific history and evidence of the states of the texts, how it arrived to us and how a modern publisher publishes the fucking text.
>Those are two languages
Yes? Those were the languages of Greek and Roman pagans.
>Christianity has a long long long long long long long history of bickering over translation issues and valuing a pedantic adherence to the most humble letter or syllable.
Translating what? Greek to greek? Latin to latin?
> If there is an ur-text we don't have it. There's just fingers-crossed at the end of the day underneath whatever scholarly consensus
We have ur-text of some things, some we only have thanks christian copyists.

>>19793635
What technology would prove a text was faithfully reproduced? No original, no dice

>>19793651
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_science
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpolation_(manuscripts)

Take one example: we had no information about most gnostic sects directly, the only source of information was what christians wrote about them. Gnostic texts were found 1500 later and confirmed what chirstians wrote about them and how they quoted the gnostic texts verbatim. Have you ever heard about Irinaeus, Hyppolitus?

>>19793666
>were found 1500 later
1500 years* later

and note: these scholars (Irinaeus, Hippolytus, etc.) were not copyists and still copied the texts perfectly.

>>19793666
>portions of heretical texts were quoted in order to be refuted
>the quotes match the originals
Wow really, if you have the originals you can prove what the originals say? No shit. And there was good reason to copy and preserve the refutations containing extracts of the originals rather than the originals in toto, which is of course why these were lost for 1500 years, because they were not deemed worthy of total preservation.

>>19793685
>Wow really, if you have the originals you can prove what the originals say? No shit.
And this is the reason why, without any detectable interpolation, the texts which survived only thanks to christians are likewise perfectly preserved, you idiot.

>there was good reason to copy and preserve the refutations containing extracts of the originals rather than the originals in toto, which is of course why these were lost for 1500 years, because they were not deemed worthy of total preservation.
In some cases (Celsus, for example) the original text was not copied on its own because it was available during the time of its copying by some christian refutation (Origen), then there was no need to copy the fucking text which existed during that time. But now you want christians to copy every single text, some of which they didn't have direct access to even? You are a dumb illiterate sjw nigger.

>>19793706
>the texts which survived only thanks to christians
Because they suppressed and eliminated the non-christians who would have preserved non-christian texts and we therefore only have what they elected to keep? Yes, congratulations are in order. And your other comment isn't very christlike. Some christer you are; I suppose he is only risen to be used as a club against your ideological enemies.

>>19791870
>Embrace Islam because even Muslim dogs can admire the beauty of Hellenistic Greece

Go fuck a pig, moha mad

>>19793739
>Because they suppressed and eliminated the non-christians who would have preserved non-christian texts
I'm telling you these texts were preserved. But tell me how christians slaughtered every single pagan, gnostic, heretic, when for example the platonic academy (during the Christian government of Rome) was maintained by christian funds until Justinian.

>And your other comment isn't very christlike
I'm not a christian. But you are worse than the worst evangelical slave moralist retard.

>>19793776
If they were preserved, where are they? Where did all the Greek and Roman literature go? Only a fraction is left, and that is because of decisions made by christers as to what was important after their slave revolt finally succeeded. Who really needs a copy of Archimedes when you could reuse the document to write about your utopia?

>>19793835
They are here (Plato, Aristotle, Sophocles....... do I need to list everything?). What did not survive had a lot of different causes. You know a lot was lost before Christianity was even a thing? Have you heard about something like Library of Alexandria?

they were unironically social outcast seething incels with ocd. half of them today would be posting on /pol/ and the other half would be shooting up schools

>>19794103
Nah, they had views acceptable or gonna be accepted at the time.

They'd be like neo-marxists or leftists while /pol/ would be the neo-pagans hunting down Christians or muh filthy foreign jewish religion.

>>19794103
>>19794567
>Reducing your historical perspective to who would be /pol/ posting

>>19794573
That's not my perspective at all, I'm just responding to the faulty analogy he made.

>>19792842
Based, God bless you.

>>19793305
>I'd be sad to see that country go
Why would you be sad? Unless you're in finance, journalism or government bureaucracy in which case you're fucked. The new regime would no doubt view much of the current elite as enemies to be overcome, so they would have to break up and replace many institutions with new people more friendly to them. They would also need to direct most of their police resources against putting down riots by ideological opponents, so anarcho-tyranny ends and citizens are free to arm themselves and form mutual defense pacts.
Immigration would likely be limited to those who share the religious beliefs of the new order, so there would be a labor shortage and wages would rise. The downside is that the price of labor intensive services would rise accordingly, so you would have fewer luxuries. I don't really see why this should be a cause for sadness, however. You're basically trading away your pokemon cards and frozen tendies and getting security, job opportunities and strong monocultural communities in exchange.
>>19793312
>Their ban on abortion would make them a minority in 30 years.
>>19793356
>It almost seems like a distraction, keep religious people focused on muh black babies instead of other issues.
If they were able to enforce a blanket ban it would certainly cause the black population to rise. The White Evangelical and Hispanic Catholic populations would also continue to rise, however, resulting in a balkanized USA. People generally don't mix very much unless they are pressured to though - Blacks don't like their neighborhoods "gentrified" anymore than Whites like them "diversified". Given the opportunity they would self segregate into separate polities, either controlled by the new regime directly or becoming satellite states of a central power.
The much more likely scenario, however, is that they wouldn't be able to enforce a ban on abortion outside the areas where they are already the majority. Think of the current strategy of setting up sanctuary cities for the unborn, but expanded to a county or even state level. They would thus raise their own birth rates while other groups continue at their present rate.
>>19793374
>The entire Jewish species are spiteful mutants
I suspect that is more true of those who leave, or are rejected by, the Orthodox community. Hardline rabbinic Judaism is very eugenic in nature, favoring high intelligence and in-group preference. A lot of the genetically healthiest Jews have also made Aliyah, leaving the mutants behind in their former host nations (just look at the difference in appearance between an average Israeli and an average diaspora Jew).
If you wanted to criticize the Jewish influence on the West, I think it would be more accurate to call them dumpers rather than parasites. That is to say, they dump their genetic waste on their hosts, so that their core population can remain as pure and vital as possible.

>>19794567
1st century /pol/ would probably end up divided between Catonians trying to restore the good old days of Roman power, and Christians praying for complete collapse so they can build Christ's kingdom on Earth. /lit/ would be full of Neoplatonists flexing their big brains while society turns to shit around them.

>>19791870
>embrace islam, brother
What do you think an Islamic West would actually look like? I personally find Islam very interesting, but most people here don't relate to it and still see it as a foreign influence. Most Muslim groups grow more by immigration and birth rates than by conversion. Salafi groups do quite well with conversion among the poor and disadvantaged, but I can't see a majority of people being drawn to their way of life.
Suppose there were a scenario like the one described in these posts: >>19792971 >>19793001 >>19793282 >>19793305 >>19793312 >>19793356 >>19796000
Most of these anons are working with the assumption that the decadent period of Western civilization will be ended by some form of Evangelical Protestant Christianity. One could, however, envision a scenario where the Muslim birth rate and immigration rate outstrips all others, leading to an Islamic West (or at least an Islamic Europe, as the trends are different in North America). There would be a tipping point where the Muslim population is sufficient to gain political dominance, but still dealing with resistance from those loyal to the old regime. There would also be conflict between Muslims whose cultures are very different. How would they implement Sharia when they have a dozen different interpretations?

>>19793502
He even looks like one of the evil bishops in Battle Chess 3D.

>>19792092
Hehe 4d ((((chess))))

>>19797444
Trips of truth.

>>19796942
Not to mention the Gnostics of /x/.

>>19797322
I think it would be completely disastrous and ultimately self-destructive. I'm sure that for many living in an Islamic West would be preferable to what we have now, but for those of us who still cling to a deeper sense of what the West is and should be it would be a harrowing experience.

I remember Peter Hitchens speaking of his pessimistic vision for the future -- he saw it as something like the outskirts of Istanbul: miles and miles of ugly concrete constructions and traffic and plastic and noise. I think this is what an Islamic West would be. The mullah's call sounding in the bazaar as street gangs push heroin in the alleyways before some sectarian from one of the inevitable extremist offshoots blows up one of the last remaining examples of that city's former glory.

Anyway, this is one of the best threads I've seen on /lit/ in ages. Seems like the dross of 2020-2021 have finally been swept away. There are people here with whom I profoundly disagree, and yet they can at least articulate an argument worth responding to. Well done all.

>>19791870
the muslimerinos did WHAT??? they abstained from destroying classical monuments for once? they postured with some european thinkers once?
OMG islam is truly superior ALHAMDULIALLAH MUHAMMAD TAKBALL MAQFIR!!

>>19797917
I kinda agree and I'm Muslim. though imo it isn't all that likely. People frame the fall of the west as an intrusion of external forces, but quite frankly by the end of this century, if all continues as is, we'll all be western faggots. I posted something regarding this (in an American context) before, gonna greentext myself against my better judgement.
>The whole "Mexico's taking over" bit is one of the things the right has been the most incorrect on, we're reeling the Northern Mexican states into our economic orbit and away from Mexico city in a truly fascinating way. Imo, in the future we will see something akin to border stock markets where these small techno-fiefdoms will be sold. There's this idea on the right that the reason liberalism is bad is because it doesn't actually cause any of the positive things is purports to aim for, but imo it's equalizing everything and everyone as we speak. The real fear for me is that the future humans will be happy under neo-feudal liberalism, that it will make good on all of it's promises.
Obviously the situation with immigration in Europe is different, but the combined tide of immigrants from Eastern Europe and MENA will become pozzed all the same. Depends on if Russia collapses first I guess. That being said, and Islamic Europe wouldn't really be "western" anymore, imo that only includes the countries influenced by the western (Catholic originally, but I'm including protestants here) church.

>>19798038
Russia will be majority muslim by 2050.

>>19796942
Well we don't really see many people on /pol/ supporting the kind of collapse unless it's a return to the past.

>>19797956
OMG BASED PISSLAM

>>19798343
I severely doubt that, despite their current demographic issues, the Russian population of Russia is far better organized than the Muslim population of Russia (or any other minority group). Unless Russia magically has a wokeness movement identical to those of the west, this will not change. For such a thing to happen Russian society would have to collapse first anyways, ergo what I said in my previous post. The whole meme that Russian Muslims are heccin based or whatever isn't true, but they aren't exactly Steppe Nafris.

>>19797917
>I'm sure that for many living in an Islamic West would be preferable to what we have now, but for those of us who still cling to a deeper sense of what the West is and should be it would be a harrowing experience.
That's how I imagine it must have felt to live during the rise of Christianity in Europe. You would be losing much of who you are, but that also comes with the opportunity for a fresh start. A rebuilding on the ashes.
>I remember Peter Hitchens speaking of his pessimistic vision for the future
>I think this is what an Islamic West would be.
Why do you draw the connection between those things? Surely much of this derelict vision arises secularization - Hitchens himself points to the loss of faith as a cause of it. Why would an Islamic West be like modern day Istanbul, as opposed to the Istanbul of the Ottoman empire at its zenith?
>>19798038
>we'll all be western faggots
>The real fear for me is that the future humans will be happy under neo-feudal liberalism, that it will make good on all of it's promises.
I wouldn't worry too much about that, as the people who are happy with it so far are failing to breed above replacement rate. They are also lousy at converting people, since they have no positive vision of the future outside of more consumption. The few who do convert will, in turn, breed below replacement and so the cycle repeats.
>That being said, and Islamic Europe wouldn't really be "western" anymore
True, in the same way a Christian Europe isn't Classical or Roman anymore, even if the church can keep the trappings of Rome alive for a while. They still managed to preserve and build upon much of the civilization that preceded them - we wouldn't have such a developed Aristotelian philosophy if it wasn't for the Scholastics, for example. I'm interested in what an Islamic society might do if they inherited the accomplishments of Christendom.
>>19798460
Actual return to the past never happens though. It is only recapitulated in new societies. Would /pol/ really turn down a chance at restoration, just because it doesn't look exactly like Bavaria in 1000AD?

>>19798540
No, but /pol/ never supports anything jewish related. They wouldn't support a religion that seems "meeker" and something that is more towards equity.

>>19798540
>I wouldn't worry too much about that, as the people who are happy with it so far are failing to breed above replacement rate. They are also lousy at converting people, since they have no positive vision of the future outside of more consumption. The few who do convert will, in turn, breed below replacement and so the cycle repeats.
I hope so man.
>I'm interested in what an Islamic society might do if they inherited the accomplishments of Christendom
I mean I'm a Muslim so I'm biased but worst case scenario, world wide collapse of formally organized society will make an Islamic Europe similar to say, the Taifa periods but all across Europe in the modern day. Best case scenario, some new Islamic-Western synthesis. Not anything like previous Islamic societies in the west. Complete conjecture but I imagine the kind of European "sexual deviancy" (at least it seems that way to me as an American) and old orientalist aesthetics might converge. Like all that orientalist art but real and with forests in the background.

>>19798540
>I'm interested in what an Islamic society might do if they inherited the accomplishments of Christendom.
They already did. Its called the Middle East

>>19793451
Islam facilitated safe trade and journey under a more or less unified empire for centuries. In this stable place sciences arts and humanities flourished and outdid the European continent for centuries after its collapse.

To say that Islam is the reason and not the Mongols, Anglo-French betrayal, Israel's need to have weak neighbours married to American interventionism..... is to out yourself as an ignoramus who should be thankful this is an anonymous site.

>>19793451
Prageruni lecture over or you'll spout some more BS?

>>19797956
Christians and Islam are both jewiish mutations.

>>19792139
A society so superior it's... gone. Lol.

>>19798540
>They are also lousy at converting people, since they have no positive vision of the future outside of more consumption
Millions of people move north for this very vision—a land where you can consume as much as you can pay for! Capitalism doesn't need its priests to be fertile when it can enlarge itself by scavenging its enemies.

>>19798914
You could always try to address his points if you feel angry enough.

>>19798922
Christians stop sperging about power being everything when other arguments have failed (IMPOSSIBLE)

>>19798897
>Islam facilitated safe trade and journey under a more or less unified empire for centuries.

*Despite Islam
And the mongols did that better too

>>19798934
The only one beating the christians at the game of sperging is jews and muslims

Christianity's great wildcard has always been how it can convert populations. This is the thing the Muslims and the Jews and the Hindus don't really have. The Buddhists perhaps come close, but even they don't convert people at the scale Christianity does. That's the great thing, in any future assessment of civilizations, of paganism, Islam, Christianity, and the like. It almost doesn't matter what the ethnic makeup of a people is, they can all be converted en masse to Christianity within a generation, if the circumstances are right. It's happened before. Almost all of South and Central America were converted to Christianity within a century, not long after the Spanish took the continent.

All thanks to Our Lady of Guadalupe, of course.

>>19798582
Actual /pol/, sure. I was responding to posts about what people in the early part of the 1st millennium would be doing if they had internet access. I imagine they would be divided about the new Jewish religion in the same way that /pol/ is divided over Islam, some of them rejecting it as foreign and some wanting White Sharia.
>>19798674
>Islamic-Western synthesis
This is something I have also thought about, given that a lot of people will probably resist what they see as invasion by a foreign religion. They might end up trying to reconcile it with their own culture, rather like the Persians did with Shia.
>>19798683
They conquered the last remains of the Roman Empire, not the fully developed Christendom of the Renaissance era and beyond.
>>19798919
Even if we take that to be true, we still have to explain why the Abrahamic religions have been the most successful at spreading monotheism. Platonic philosophy can very elegantly demonstrate that creation originates with a single God, yet the Hellenistic world continued with polytheistic practices. Why didn't the superior "non Jewish" culture follow up the natural conclusion of their philosophy?
>>19798925
Yes, that's a good point. They still experience a drop in birth rates after the first generation, however. Second generation migrants generally don't breed much more than the natives of the North unless they retain their ancestral culture and religion, resisting secular and liberal influences.

>>19799517
I mean I agree with you, but you seem to be under the impression that the Muslims don't have similar levels of convertability.

>>19791870
The veneration of women in Christianity creates a better society, and as a man I would rather be married to a woman that I truly love and adore than have a haram of sex slaves. Also we need to honor and defend our mothers and they were to first to honor and defend us.

>>19791870
the library of alexandria says otherwise

>>19799517
The image is miraculous and loveable

>>19799598
Isn't worship of images banned in your covenant with Yahweh?

>>19791810
If the Christians had successfully consumed the useful Classical motifs and erased the rest, like they did to the Egyptian worldview, then no faggot Renaissance apocalypse would have been possible. Unfortunately the hecking romeaboos got their way and ruined Europe

>>19799659
I'm not a heretic

>>19799669
Europe was improved, not ruined.

>>19799709
I suppose that's why we're posting on a digital Skinner box in the aftermath of incredibly predatory and extractive mercantilization and industrialization, right?

>>19791810
Didn’t they basically revolt against Julian the Apostate because he banned them from reading/teaching Homer and the rest of the classics?

>>19799724
The reformation was where these problems started, when churches stopped being catholic, and philosophy replaced religion.

>>19799759
I agree, but the reformation had roots in the renaissance by way of humanism and textual criticism

>>19799590
>veneration of Mary
was it the right move?

>>19799659
>worship

It is tangible evidence of a miracle. How can we not adore it? It is physical, touchable proof of God's Divine power. Did you know that the tilma has had numerous plots against it? Atheists and communists have thrown acid at it, or tried to blow it up. It is still here. It even should have rotted away to nothing centuries ago since it's made from shitty cactus fiber. All by itself it should have rotted to dust. But it is still here. And it is still here because God wills it, as an image of His Mother. How can we not adore it? How can it not stand as a mockery of all atheists, and all those who disparage Christianity? Here is the proof you seek. Here is a miracle you can touch, and see, and taste! And you still don't believe? Then it's not our fault if you don't. Take your atheism and go. We gave you everything you said you wanted. All the physical proof you said you would accept. If you still don't believe, then that is on you. Remember Luke 16.

>>19792088
>Isaac the Syrian
Very based, my friend.

>>19799772
The problem with the reformation was that it was the wrong interpretation of the renaissance, it's precisely a deformation of something good.

>>19799947
>perverts something good
>therefore thing bad lalalalel

>>19799991
Protestant culture was ruined by the industrial revolution, and individualism. Not only should we venerate and adore Mary, but we should also do the same to our loved ones in this life. Christianity is the religion of the incarnate God, who became human, human beings are entangled in relationship.

>>19800054
Christianity is feminine death cult.

>>19793089
thats white people did that
if it was black christians or any other christians it wouldn't have happened

>>19799528
>we still have to explain why the Abrahamic religions have been the most successful at spreading monotheism
what are you dumb? the answer is glaring obvious
it's engineered to spread and convert
paganism is local and ethnic. why would pagans from one place care if people on a different continent followed their gods and traditions, they wouldn't, that's twisted

>>19800069
The fruits of Christianity are fertile, not a death cult but the opposite. Also the feminine is responsible for life, and the masculine is dependent upon it.

>>19800031
But the Renaissance was itself just a jilted reinterpretation of the classics warped by the whims of Italian republican high-families and trauma of shellshocked Byzantine emigres fleeing Constantinople. It was a break with the continuous Western European understanding of the classics, as handed down through Late Antiquity through the institutions of the Church and comital bureaucracy, in order to reimagine society in a way that benefited merchants and bankers. It really presaged everything that followed.
Honestly, I would say the whispers of doom were setting in sometime after the turn of the millennium. The Schism had arrived, the Catholics were undergoing centralization and laying the groundwork for the secular power later on, Scholasticism was awakening, in England and Italy the civil and commercial trends would already forecast the later Reformation-era upheavals, the Eastern church had settled the worst of its disputes but the Empire's secular institutions were unsustainably exploited laying the groundwork for Manzikert. Within the following centuries, these developments would interweave and create several paradigm shifts sealing the fate of our modern world.

>>19800157
Not everything about the modern world is bad, and reactionary takes against humanism are part of the problem. Humanism itself is just the wrong understanding of a Catholic truth, if anything the modern world has the seeds for something better on the horizon, but it can only be unlocked with St Peters keys. The modern world is a Catholic problem, which requires a Catholic solution, and the alternative may as well be human extinction.

>>19800192
>Humanism itself is just the wrong understanding of a Catholic truth
elaborate

>>19800196
Human dignity is dependent upon our lineage to Christ, human rights matter because human dignity is divine and sacred. Reactionaries against humanism are both right and wrong, and their solutions will lead to catastrophic atrocities.

>>19800206
the death of christianity results in the complete death of societ

>>19800192
>Not everything about the modern world is bad
Everything that's still good is essentially a shell of its former self, and I think that drawing these long lineages of decay is fully warranted if not particularly productive

>>19800217
The reason the modern world doesn't work is because of bad theology

>>19800216
Absolutely, social decay, race based tribalism, cannibalization, brutality, bloodshed, and a stronger force will come and force order upon everyone. The good outcome is the consecration of Russia, the reunion of the churches, Vatican III final fantasy cities.

>>19800206
Human rights don't exist and they're an anything-goes utopian materialist abomination. The early Anglo Liberals spawned the concept, Masonic conspiracies championed & spread it, and it hasn't really changed at all since inception, or gone wrong; it was toxic anti-social sophistry from the start. It served the interests of merchants, patronized intellectuals, and bureaucrats.
The only thing enshrined concepts of human rights did, was slightly reversed certain excesses of state and industrial power which did not exist in Medieval Europe to begin with, in other words, elaborated humanism only fixed problems humanism created. For example, large-scale slavery or colonial abuses or extractive labor creating and subjugating a factory-working-class. Even so, the English only stopped abuses when they were ruined and no longer capable of them, and the Americans never stopped at all, they shipped them abroad while keeping some domestic practice the entire time.
Furthermore, the entire concept enshrines a Whiggish materialist civil mindset which cannot be the basis for any stable society. The entire modern mindset is essentially based in English and German bourgeois entitlement of the 16th century. Their brand of urban sensibility is somewhat fittingly labeled "bourgeois" in modern parlance, but of course the communists who mostly use this term are just metastasized from it in their own sensibilities; I use it with some distinction.

>>19800241
>Human rights don't exist
Human rights do exist, the humanist understanding is just wrong and heretical. Human rights are divine, every single human being without exception shares the divine image of Christ, and this was why the incarnation was so important. Abolish human rights and everyone gets turned into dogfood

>>19800222
Bad theology is just one area of the general autism that ruined the modern world, which was pushed by Greeks (undermining the Eastern empire in a number of ways therefore allowing Islam to exist) and Germans (qua Italians qua Lombards, qua Normans qua Franks).
To wit, the Byzantines had numerous crippling heresies to deal with, and the Franks injected the Filioque as a shatterpoint for the entire Nicene relations. literally because it was an innovated custom in Northwestern Europe at the same time Charlemagne was around, with a weak Empress with shaky backing in the East

Murder is not acceptable, the Catholic Church is right. Treat some people like animals, and everyone becomes an animal. People intuitively know it's wrong, but because their beliefs are unrooted and undefendable, they will get slowly boiled until we have Aztec tier violence. This is also a spiritual issue, many peoples epic radical worldviews they've adopted in the past few years are part of a larger grotesque painting

>>19800262
Bad theology and autism was always a lack of respect for mystery, even Thomas Aquinas admitted that the truth was much bigger. The desire people have for traditional liturgy is a desire to restore mystery, the Church is actually in a good place to propel human civilization if it gets it's house in order.

>>19800254
So why frame this understanding, which existed for 1.5 thousand years without issue before any whisper of humanism, through not just a humanist framework but an explicitly liberal framework?
Codifying these things is not helpful. It only generates legalistic mindsets which inevitably collapse into nihilism under their own weight.

>>19791870
His maternal grandfather was a greek orthodox priest and he himself might not be a theist at all. Compare him to his son his immediate successor and you’ll see the differences.

>>19800275
Christian human dignity is easy to understand, because Jesus is easy to understand. Codifying is helpful because it protects common sense from malicious philosophy and sophism

>>19800281
>Codifying is helpful because it protects common sense from malicious philosophy and sophism
The modern concept of human rights is founded on a decontextualized Christian sense of human dignity, so I don't see that it has been immune from sophism in any way.
France, especially, was a resurgent Catholic country after the horrors of the Revolution and they degraded very fast indeed.

>>19800293
There's been a war against Catholic culture and the Church for centuries, only now the world of the builders is finally crumbling to the point of disrepair. If you move past a reactionary mindset, you trust that God allows evil to take place so that he can manifest a greater good, liberalism is flawed but there can still be continuity, and the Church holds the keys to that continuity. I've speculated that the third secret of Fatima was about a new Christendom that could be a possibility.

>>19800301
I am Eastern Orthodox and incredibly familiar with coping against evil and suffering and defeat. Same with continuity, given that both Islam and Communism have arguably left us with some benefits.
However, it seems foolish to refuse to learn from the past and apply those lessons, and one can certainly never stop declaring when the prevailing ideology is evil and wrong, and in which ways. The first point is just good practice, and the second point speeds the recontextualization after whatever enemy is defeated.
Without the reactionary mindset, the Russian state would have never reined in its oligarchs even slightly, and it probably wouldn't have nurtured the resurgent Church. Same goes for Serbia. Bulgaria nd Romania lacked it in one way or another, and they are paying for that. Catholic examples could be Croatia vs. Slovenia.

>>19800230
>The good outcome is the consecration of Russia, the reunion of the churches, Vatican III final fantasy cities.
Im sorry for not being an erudite on these matters but what does it all mean? What would undoing the schism do in the long run?

>>19800320
>However, it seems foolish to refuse to learn from the past and apply those lessons
Learning from the past isn't breaking continuity, Peter denied Christ several times and still prevailed in accomplishing the work of the Holy Spirit. Christian martyrdom was never fruitless, it turned the world upsidown.

>>19800340
>What would undoing the schism do in the long run?
The Church is meant to be united, not a fragmentation of various bodies. Catholicity is actually necessary for the continuity of humanity, the break in Catholicity will bottleneck the entire world and open the doors for atrocity. There is only one Christ, one Church, and one heavenly body of which humanity has been destined for.

>>19800320
>Same with continuity, given that both Islam and Communism have arguably left us with some benefits.
Yes and from a Catholic position those good fruits are to be integrated, this is what Catholicity is, not being a reactionary.

>>19793089
That's the equivalent of attributing human colonization to rats, just because rats where on ships doesn't mean they are responsible for them sailing around the world

>>19800301
>allows evil to take place so that he can manifest a greater good
are you saying the obnoxious cretinous tardlarpers are like Gollum?

>>19800457
False equivalence. You can demonstrate how Christianity led to the kinds of developments that enabled colonisation (as well as driving the colonisation itself -- a lot of the early explorers were either motivated by Christianity, or were in fact missionaries and monks -- and the Church often pressured rulers to open up new territories for its missionary activity). You should read Dominion.

>>19799991
>muh miracles
ah yes i'm sure no efforts have been made to preserve the icon it's just magic

>>19800320
Right, there's a distinction between a Faith that sees all past evils as somehow necessary, but works always to move beyond them, and a Fatalism that blindly accepts everything as it is and refuses to consider change.

>>19800545
who?

>>19800340
The Catholic church is an aberration. The obsession with papal primacy has destroyed the authentic sense of Christian community, and of knowledge and power being distributed across the Church, with inerrancy understood in mystical terms, rather than being simplified and codified by the hand of a single man.

By their fruits ye shall know them -- and the fruits of these are the mass rape of children.

Undoing the schism cannot be achieved by Orthodoxy changing to accept Popery -- it can only happen if the Latin church finally returns.

This would be a good thing, because it would be better if so much of the world's population did not live in fear of this monstrous organisation, with its sex obsession and worldliness. The current pope, with his radicalism and limited understanding of Christ -- the focus being solely on the lowly, the meek, and the humble, without being balanced by an the majesty, the victory, the fire and the sword -- demonstrates the incompleteness, and the brokenness of his church.

>>19800571
I'm impressed. You must be very committed to being pre-modern in thought and in what you read

>>19800596
>the focus being solely on the lowly, the meek, and the humble
Oh you mean the actual New Testament stuff? If you don't like slave morality don't pretend to be a Christian on 4channel

>>19800080
Yes? And? This really goes back to my original point: the European Civilisation is Christianity -- it is the framework, foundation, and sustenance of our societies -- the reason being that it synthesises our culture and heritage, preserves our rights and symbols, and combines both the Imperial (Roman) and democratic (Greek) highpoints of our past, and has its ultimate source in Indo-European cosmology.

I am less a Christian because I have been convinced and persuaded by rational arguments, and more because it is me: this is my heritage; I was born to believe this bizarre, irrational, and glorious creed: monotheistic and Biblical and scriptural, yet somehow also pagan and ritualistic and deeply embedded in the landscape of the European continent.

>>19800602
Have you actually read through the New Testament? There's more to it than the Jesusist philosophy. You can't have one without the other. This is the point of Christianity that quakers and methodists and all the left-wing types don't seem to get -- it has a dual nature (just as the more viciously elitist traditionalist catholics ignore what you call 'slave morality').

It is a faith of both emperors and slaves.

>>19792971
I’ve come to the same conclusion myself

>>19798934
You must have "mistaken" me for a Christian in order to score a cheap dunk, which makes you a: sperg.

>>19799485
>*Despite Islam

Let's hear your arguments then why Islam was detrimental to the region.

>>19799556
They don't. They have to force their faith on unwilling populations.

>>19800640
Force, how?
Jizya (tax for subjects) was a smaller amount than Zakat (tax for Muslims).

>>19800695
Islam spreads solely by the sword. It's not as if some travelling mullah goes into a new society and persuades them of the truth of the Koran, or sets an example of holiness by being martyred (as in Christian martyrdom, where you are killed for your faith, not Islamic martyrdom, where you kill yourself and others).

No, he arrives as part of an invading army, and you either convert or die, or, depending on the time period (and provided you are a christian or jew), you can be a second class citizen.

>>19800723
>Islam spreads solely by the sword
Then how come people convert out ot free will, today? That alone disproves your statement.

>>19800801
No, it doesn't.

Some individuals choosing to convert to Islam doesn't negate 1400 years of conquest.

We are talking about tendencies and general characteristics (because these are human cultural phenomena on a vast scale), not absolute definitions. As such, the founding centuries are particularly instructive: Islam was, and remains, fundamentally a religion of subjugation.

>>19800808
You say: "No, it doesn't."

My response: it does.
I will prove it by quoting you:
"Islam spreads solely by the sword."
>solely

Islam did not force people to convert in Britain for example.

>>19800816
Sorry, allow me to rephrase.

Islam has spread from a pocket of Arabia to every continent of the world, developing from some minor semitic sect into the world's second largest religion, with 1.9 billion followers, primarily through conquest, subjugation, violence, and bloodshed, with forcible conversions and genocides.

Occasionally some people willingly convert in countries that have not yet been fully subjugated (although in those countries, the invasion is ongoing -- however it proceeds by more underhanded means (immigration and birth rates)).

Islam spreads solely by the sword -- except for a miniscule minority of individuals who willingly convert.

>>19800816
And actually most of the conversions in Britain are forced (usually girls who have already been exploited/trafficked and are then pushed into wearing a Burqa).

>>19800839
>most
>not all

>>>solely

>>19800860
You're being a little autistic.

If I have a glass of water, and I put a grain of sand in it, it's still a glass of water.

>>19800952
It was you who used the word solely.

>>19800723
Christians have historically done similar things. It seems to be an aspect in most Abrahamic religions.

>>19801681
Yes, they have. Just as some manifestations of Islam have been predominantly peaceful and compassionate, some manifestations of Christianity have been viciously warlike and cruel.

But I am talking about the general characteristics of each religion: specifically the circumstances of their birth, and their development over those crucial first few centuries: Islam as a religion of conquest, founded by a warlord with his harem, whose death was immediately followed by violent schisms and battles for succession; and Christianity, created by a carpenter, born in a manger and attended by both shepherds and kings, tortured and murdered by religious and imperial authorities, which was spread across Europe not by conquering armies but by martyrs and missionaries, who converted with the example of their deeds.

>>19801758
One is so very human; the other is divine.

>>19801758
Both Islam and Christianity grew for geopolitical reasons, and it's doubtful that their founders even existed. The Flavian family, which were pretty much like the first Rothschilds by heavily mixing with Jews, backed Christianity for complex geopolitical reasons, perhaps to pave the way for Feudalism and strip property rights (source: Joe Atwill). Islam grew in Sassanian empire because some powerful and traitorous royal families were tired of the priestly caste's unbridled power (i.e., mobeds) and also probably saw some economic benefit in this course of action such as opening trade routes (source: need to find it again). Both religions have a complex genesis, and there is increasingly more research indicating Muhammad's lack of existence.
All of West Eurasia is spiritually depraved and somewhat stupid. Only Easterners like India and China have impressive mystical traditions that are philosophically defensible. If it were up to me, I would destroy every single Abrahamic holy site and replace it with Sanghas, forcing your descendants to read the Lotus Sutra and slaughtering all those who go on and on about some stupid Jew from the Levant or dirty Bedouin from the desert, both of which probably didn't exist and were (largely) fictional constructs for complex geopolitical reasons.
I think there are worse things than being warlike (e.g. Celts), such as manufacturing fake and spiritually impoverished narratives that manipulate the masses for purposes of consolidating the power of a few sneaky and duplicitous wealthy families.

>>19801858
Ok Zhang

>>19801876
We live in an age of increasingly refined scholarly translations. While modernity has many negative aspects, there is at least one positive in that we have access to more rigorous scholarly material.
Abrahamic religions are philosophically indefensible. Claiming some irrelevant Semitic tribe(s) had exclusive access to divine wisdom is stupid. These traditions obviously grew largely for geopolitical reasons, and given the age of disenchantment in Abrahamism's dogmas, we now have more unique scholarly takes on their historical spread from the likes of Joe Atwill and more. None of these religions grew because people truly believed in them, and likewise, they are not possible to believe in without brainwashing. For example, they base their foundations on historical claims of revelation rather than actual metaphysical ones. Why should I care about either a stupid dirty Jew or Arab from the Semitic sphere? A better question is why did the original people who funded their spreads wanted my ancestors to believe in it?
There is absolutely no positive spiritual quality to the Abrahamic religions. They are religions for icchantika, and you will have a negative rebirth and suffer for thousands of kalpas.

>>19801922
ning nang nong
ching chang chong

>>19801940
Why do you think I am Chinese? Why don't you go pray to that dead Jew on a stick or worship that internal black stone of death some more.
Worship a Jew for 1000+ years, become a Jew.
Worship a Bedouin's schizophrenic message for 1000+ years, become an Arab.
There are no Indo-European derived cultures or peoples anymore. It's just various shades of Semites.

>>19801962
The last Romans were Japanese

>>19801971
Sounds like something a bot based on deep learning algorithms, like GPT-3, would say when encountering something unexpected.
I've come across bots more sophisticated than you.

>>19801962
>Why do you think I am Chinese? Why don't you go pray to that dead Jew on a stick or worship that internal black stone of death some more.
Worship a Jew for 1000+ years, become a Jew.
Worship a Bedouin's schizophrenic message for 1000+ years, become an Arab.
There are no Indo-European derived cultures or peoples anymore. It's just various shades of Semites.

>>19802005
You sound like the typical idiot on this board yourself. Anyway the Japanese actually honor Heracles iconographically in the form of Vajrapani, the guardian of the Buddha. I was being figurative but you can make a more literal case if you want to.

>>19802017
>You sound like the typical idiot on this board yourself. Anyway the Japanese actually honor Heracles iconographically in the form of Vajrapani, the guardian of the Buddha. I was being figurative but you can make a more literal case if you want to.

I just don't like overly zealous or fanatical people regardless of religion. People that center their whole lives around a religion or ideology are annoying and not pleasant to talk too.

>>19802017
You're only interested in identity politics and should genuinely fuck off to /pol/. I don't pick and choose traditions based on ancestral belonging.
Also, did I insult the Greeks in my original message?
There were minor to moderate Greek and Zoroastrian philosophical influences during the development of Mahayana in Balkh, Gandhara, and Kushan Empire.
My criticism of Abrahamic religion is that it is philosophically indefensible. A contemplative mind will not naturally lead to concluding a Jew with a megalomaniac complex was the Son of God or that a Bedouin had the "final revelation". These are claims that cannot be discovered by apprehending the true nature of one's own mind. They require cucking to the Semites and turning off one's honest, inquiring mind and claiming salvation is found external from the mind. This is why you are an icchantika and shall suffer for thousands of kalpas. It's a serious matter and in some sense you deserve to be mercy killed.

>>19802057
Secular humanism is a religion, dumb cunt. Your new priests wear lab coats, and your new religious institutions are globalist organizations like WEF, WHO, and so forth. You will suffer for thousands upon thousands of kalpas, you sanctimonious piece of shit.

>>19802072
>Secular humanism is a religion
Secular humanism is **effectively** a religion*

>>19802050
I'd rather be a monke than a bot, thanks

>>19802063
>You're only interested in identity politics and should genuinely fuck off to /pol/.
>the rest of your post

>>19802072
I never said I was a humanist, I just said I don't like fanatical religious people. Im guessing you fall I to that category.

>>19802063
>>19802072
You definitely come across as a centred and compassionate being who has found the three-fold supreme Buddha jewel within his heart-mind centre.

Does your social credit score increase for posting this stuff? Or will you still get arrested for using a VPN?

>>19802112
Both self-loathing, oversocialized liberals and far-right memelord edgelords deserve the bullet. You are the genetic trash of your peoples and fall into the system of controlled dialectics of globalist elites. You're not capable of thinking about anything outside of your petty identity politics matrix.

>>19802125
have sex

>>19802125
Neither of those people you describe; you are dense and tilting at windmills yourself

>>19802125
Oh wait, you can't, because your superior Buddhist culture aborts all the female foetuses and now there aren't enough women

>>19802124
Bodhidharma in Bloodstream Sermons and the Mahaparinirvana Sutra said it's fine to kill icchantikas.
Christcucks wear sheep's clothing and cause massive destruction utilizing deceitful tactics, sometimes through NGOs, whereas Mudslimes just appear as wolves and then proceed to cause damage.
There isn't a single beautiful line of verse from the entirety of the Christian, Islamic, or Jewish traditions. Every single last one of you deserves to be either force converted or killed.

Namo Amitabha Buddha

>>19802140
I am thinking about things on a more metaphysical and phenomenological context, something which is beyond your identity politics obsessed shit brain.
Also, Mahayana involved more than just East or Southeast Asians in its early development. There were also Greek, Persian, and other races of people who were Mahayana in ancient times.

>>19801922
>geopolitical reasons
>who was ashoka
>what was the han dynasty
you're an idiot

>>19802132
Owned!

>>19802178
You're clearly very unhappy and I genuinely hope things get better for you.

>>19802005
congratulations on proving him right

>>19802229
The growth of Mahayana in Central Asia involved a confluence of influences from the Greeks, Persians, and Indians, and involved a sincere interest of exploring the epistemological foundations underlying "prajnaparamita", which is philosophically defensible. It involves the tacit apprehension of the true nature of one's mind. Bodhidharma came from such a Central Asian culture. To treat salvation as external from one's mind, as involving the need to know of an irrelevant Jew or Bedouin from the Semitic sphere, is to become an icchantika. It denies the Buddha nature of all sentient beings, which involves the potential to awaken to one's original nature and thus attain Buddha hood. I have read many Mahayana Sutras and meditated for 7-9 hrs for three days straight during my time at a Buddhist center.
One reason Mahayana did not grow as large as Abrahamic filth is because the former can only be used for geopolitical purposes when twisted by the elites. However, the imperial elements of Abrahamic religions is inherent in its very structure and involves an inevitable strengthening of Semites or forming coalitions with them. Jews as subversive agents began with the Flavian family forming an alliance and mixing with them to become a kind of Rothschild like family. Islam was obviously a tool of Arabic imperialism, which is likewise ingrained in its rituals and scriptures.
Bodhisattvas are far more numinous and compassionate than stupid Jews or Muslims. Every single last Jew, Christcuck, and Muslim needs to die. By the name of Avalokiteshvara, I shall cut off your heads and place them ontop of stones with Sanskrit engraved dharanis. Reading the Irish Celtic myths like Cuchulainn in Ulster kind of inspired me in this regard.

>>19802125
Please spare me. I would expect basic bitch opinions like this on /his/, not /lit/.

>>19792971
Many people would say that the most problematic aspects of christianity (besides it being based on the ethnoreligion of ancient talibs) is how it conserved the destructive parts of the soil it came from. "turning the other cheek", an unhealthy obsession with egalitarianism, and such are all extremely destructive to healthy cultures and make any culture that internalizes them very susceptible to other cultures and religions which are more militant and selfish.

>>19799517
Entire peoples being converted to christianity was entirely dependent on christianity being married to state power : missionaries usually converted only the elites and then convinced these elites to outlaw paganism, which is what made those mass conversions possible.

This is why it's losing to islam now, islam is specifically made to be inseparable from state power, while christianity explicitly separates church and state by default.

>>19802342
>paragraph one
Christianity arose in a complex framework of Graeco-Roman and oriental (Near- and Middle-Eastern) cultural motifs of the Hellenistic period, who cared a lot about philosophy, and this applies in small part even to Islam. Otherwise, this passage boils down to "Abrahamics bad because they don't make you a Buddha which is self-evidently bad independent of culture, no I won't compare the soteriology in any deeper sense I'll just spout obscure phrases", which is not compelling at all. I might as well tell you to seek theosis and true human self-actualization in God through the direct experience of theoria, instead of reading demonic writings seeking to drive you away from divine unity.
Also, Mesopotamia and India were both independent cradles of civilization with a distinguished history so I'm not sure why semites live rent-free in your mind to this extent
>latter paragraphs
wow look, imperial elements
You are a joke and New Age adjacent, shame on you.

>>19802414
Curiously, these effects are only observed in some places after almost 2k years when Christianity is weak. Remember, the Crusades and Reconquista didn't happen.
Again, presentists are moronic. There are more parsimonious explanations for tranny pastors and Western suicide besides "it's actually an ancient Jewish mastermind plot"

>>19802471
>This is why it's losing to islam now, islam is specifically made to be inseparable from state power, while christianity explicitly separates church and state by default.
TIL the Byzantine Empire had a separation of church and state

>>19802506
You know what he means.

>>19802510
The separation of Church and state is a recent phenomenon. Even Ireland and Spain kept them closely related up until very recently. I think Ireland's constitution even recognizes catholicsm officially

>>19802523
"Leave to Caesar what is his and to God what is God's".

>>19802561
I guess you could be like one of thos radical protties who thinks Constantine was an agent of satan and that the catholic church is the whore of babylon. Im a protestant but not a radical like that. I dont believe that verse necessitates a legally explicit division between ecclesiastical and state authority.

>>19802510
I was pointing out the generalization was flawed.
Another counterexample is how the Muslim relationship to state power is extremely muddied by sectarianism.
Another counterexample is how separation of church and state is actually most observed in more Christian Western countries like America, while all the countries with state churches proceeded to nosedive the church according to the preferences of the liberal constitutionalist states. And it is the state that turns a blind eye to Muslim abuses in the West.

>>19802561
Again, when you start having coins minted with Christ Pantokrator on them, that says something.
Christians are indeed for church-state union when it benefits them, for the most part

>>19798919
judaism and islam are Christian heresies

>>19802499
>Christianity arose in a complex framework of Graeco-Roman and oriental (Near- and Middle-Eastern) cultural motifs of the Hellenistic period, who cared a lot about philosophy, and this applies in small part even to Islam.
Christianity grew with backing of Flavian family due to various geopolitical objectives like uniting a more ethnically diverse empire and paving the way for feudalism by stripping property rights. Look up Joe Atwill on Bitchute. He goes into better depth than me. I also already explained why Islam grew during its conquest, which had to do with traitorous noble houses no longer benefitting from their own priestly caste.
>"Abrahamics bad because they don't make you a Buddha which is self-evidently bad independent of culture, no I won't compare the soteriology in any deeper sense I'll just spout obscure phrases"
Nothing in Abrahamism constitutes a skillful means (upaya) to the One Vehicle (ekayana). They are detriments rooted in placing faith in the exclusive revelation of Semitic tribes, which is treated as external from the mind, and these Semitic tribes were historically called notorious liars by the Egyptians, Persians, and Greeks. There was a more complex geopolitical reason for their growth. The growth of Abrahamism was *solely* due to geopolitical reasons unlike Mahayana.
>Mesopotamia and India were both independent cradles of civilization with a distinguished history so I'm not sure why semites live rent-free in your mind to this extent
Mesopotamia was trash. I am pretty sure some research points to Central Asia as being the cradle of civilization.
>New Age adjacent
I've read various sutras like Lotus, Diamond, Heart, Platform, and etc. I am making the argument that Abrahamism is a path for icchantika and that it doesn't lead to the One Vehicle.

>>19802506
>>19802523
Pedantic
>>19802510
Gets it. Islam divides the world into an abode of submission and an abode of war. You are, according to their scripture, obligated to either live under an Islamic state or to 'struggle' against an infidel one if you are somehow outside of the Islamic world. From the 7th century until today Islam has made use of this concept, of creating warband to capture states and territories. Christianity is too focused on being dead so you can live with Jesus in Astral Margaritaville. It sometimes sets this aside because a preservation instinct kicks in, or a Christian people gets a taste for blood (is it any surprise Spain and Portugal, having emerged from their overthrowing of Islamic colonization, became the first vanguards of European imperialism?).

>>19802609
>Christianity grew with backing of Flavian family due to various geopolitical objectives like uniting a more ethnically diverse empire and paving the way for feudalism by stripping property rights. Look up Joe Atwill on Bitchute. He goes into better depth than me.
I don't care what some atomized libertarian post-prot schizoid with a poor grasp of history has to say on the matter. Domitian, for instance, was likely apathetic and at worst suppressive to these religions which were still tiny minorities at the time, and there is no reason at all to think they had influence in the Flavian times, but he did a great job of consolidating the influence of the Imperial cult, which was much more directly suitable to imperial control. I shouldn't have to explain why.
>They are detriments rooted in placing faith in the exclusive revelation of Semitic tribes, which is treated as external from the mind, and these Semitic tribes were historically called notorious liars by the Egyptians, Persians, and Greeks.
There are reasoned arguments as to why external revelation has value.
Historically, the Persians and Egyptians didn't really care about the Semites. They were somewhat respected by the Greeks and Romans thus allowing the unique religious arrangement to persist in the client kingdom of Israel.
>Mesopotamia was trash. I am pretty sure some research points to Central Asia as being the cradle of civilization.
Research points to five independent cradles of civilization I believe, and these two arose separately. It isn't trash in any defensible sense, you're just biased and seething

>>19802676
He's just Chinese. His grasp of history is determined by his upbringing in a soulless communist hellscape. Don't blame a dog for licking its own balls.

>>19802686
I don't think he's Chinese. They wouldn't apply Buddhism as a solution to a posed problem of "semitic" religion. The contempt for that is what's really operant here. He might be half-Iranian or something.

>>19802703
He's East Asian -- you can tell from his syntax. And based on his behaviour, I'm guessing Chinese. Still plenty of Buddhists there. Knowing he'll live his whole life a virgin (unless he pays for prostitutes) will drive him towards spirituality of some sort. They have a big Trump-esque online culture now which is specifically contemptuous about Christianity and Islam.

>>19802609
>Abrahamism is a path for icchantika
Could be considered is worship of a Brahmā or an Iśvara, so yes it would be outside of the pale of Buddhism. Not sure if it is as intensively negative as your term implies; tirthika might be better (and almost more accurate given baptismal rites and the etymology).

>>19802736
>They have a big Trump-esque online culture now which is specifically contemptuous about Christianity and Islam.
basado?

>>19802646
Thats not what pedantic means

>>19802758
>overly concerned with formal rules and trivial points of learning

>>19800612
You're just a quack tribalist masquerading behind a word salad. It's ok to be a tribalist but your Jewish God and religion mean nothing and explain nothing about reality.

> Yes and?
Europe doesn't need Christianity. It's responsible for progressive liberalism and pretty much every social-evil that exists today. It's an unnecessary burden and constantly subverts ethnocentric memetics. It is a tumor that has turned malignant, and it needs to be cut off. As simple as that. You might not like it but the Cathedrals will become Pagan temples and the Bishops will become Druids again. Just as it was.

>>19802788
>Cathedrals will become Pagan temples and the Bishops will become Druids again. Just as it was.
You base this arrogant assumption on the following:

>>19802771
Thats ironic since the other anon pedantically cited render unto Ceaser as his sole argument. The whole history of christendom contradicts anon's take. But I guess you can just wave it away by labelling it pedantic.

>>19802788
The renaissance is responsible for progressive liberalism, not Christianity.

>>19802873
History can happen contrary to scripture. I don't suppose the conquistadors turned their other cheeks as a rule. But every Muslim who has ever raised a sword to the unbeliever has done so with the blessing of his creed, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a Bartolome de las Casas among the mujahedin.

>>19802918
Pedantic

>>19802918
Exactly. And most elegantly put!

>>19802918
>But every Muslim who has ever raised a sword to the unbeliever has done so with the blessing of his creed

The Qur'an encourages only self-defensive wars. You are free to prove otherwise by quoting it.

>>19792124
So did the Europeans

>>19802972
>Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

>>19802972
Then how did this happen smart ass?

>>19802972
By islam's definition those who are not muslim are actively waging war on islam, therefore making even aggressive wars self-defensive as long as it is against infidels of any kind (mostly non-muslims or "heretical" muslims)

Islam in general plays really fast and loose with definitions, I mean, I can't think of any other religion which equates not ruling with being persecuted.

>>19803035
>equates not ruling with being persecuted.
It is the most efficient monotheism ever created. Not only are those who do not believe wrong, they are offensively wrong, and cannot be allowed to continue except in special cases where you are too weak to deal with them

>>19803035
Right, they constantly refer to themselves as 'oppressed', but what they mean by this is 'we don't control everything'.

>>19803031
anon...

>>19802703
Both my parents are from Tehran, you dumb cunt. My ethnic background also doesn't matter to the overall anti-Abrahamic message I am conveying. Your brain is rotted from identity politics, and I highly recommend taking krill oil, vitamin D3 + K2, and other supplements daily. They are good for brain healthy. You also most likely have intestinal parasites, which have adverse effects on gut microbiome and emotional regulation. Your brain and gut are complete filth.
>>19802676
I don't buy the contemporary academic biases for why Abrahamic filth grew. I accept the research *direction* of Christopher Jon Bjerknes, Joe Atwill, and Richard Carrier for Christianity's growth and spread. In regards to Islam, I've had to consult with people who have conversed with families of Yazd who have genealogies going back to Sassanian times. Both Christianity and Islam grew solely for geopolitical reasons, and they are spiritually bankrupt and philosophically indefensible traditions. Even if monotheism were true, it does not necessarily lead to accepting Abrahamic dogma.
You are just slaves of Semites, and the mental gymnastics of your rhetoric can't avoid this fact.

>>19803074
>brain healthy
brain health*

>>19803048
>It is the most efficient monotheism ever created.

Absolutely. It's probably the thing I can admire the most about it, it's made from the ground up to be the perfect meme in the original sense of the word, every single element of it is there for no other function but to destroy other memes and proliferate itself at the maximum possible rate.

>>19802736
I meant to respond to you here: >>19803074
Top paragraph.

>>19803074
I was off by one parent. I deserve some credit here you carpet cleaner

>>19803165
Both my parents are educated professionals. One is an architectural engineer and the other a nurse. I, myself, am a burned-out data scientist. Kys, memelord and edgelord faggot. Your mind has rotted from identity politics and memes.

I'm frankly not sure if islam will be able to swallow the poisonous frog that is europe. I'm reminded of that part from the end of Submission where the character converts not out of any real sense of religious conviction, but for practicality and pussy. Religion becoming mere ritual rather than conviction and a view of the world is the point of no return for most beliefs. Not that most peope didn't convert out of practical concerns in the past but it usually entailed some sort of transmutation of already existing religiosity, but there's no such in the west. I don't think it's possible to make the secular truly religious if there's no religious core to reorient.

>>19803192
You may not be a tardlarper but you've found new ways to be insufferable

>>19803252
Go pray to your Jew on a stick, infernal black rock of death, or sacrificed foreskins in vain hope for me to go away, depending on what school of Abrahamic bullshit you follow.
If you want to truly undertake the path of liberation, then I recommend starting with both the Lotus and Diamond sutras. For the former, I recommend BDK, 2nd edition, and for the latter, I recommend Red Pine's translation.
You stupid faggot. I doubt you even post about literature here. Most of the time I am posting about weird fiction, nature memoirs, or children's literature, but I don't act like a tripfag loudly proclaiming my identity. I doubt you even discuss literature besides going on and on with Christian propaganda or identity politics crap. Grow up.

>>19803298
You seem upset. I'm not sure you understand who you are arguing with; my only point was that your reading of Buddhism with occasional references to Persia and marked hostility to Abrahamism made your identity probable. I guessed you were half-Iranian but it sounds like you are a second-gen somewhere else, either way it's dividing being Iranian by two isn't it? That doesn't mean I am a christer or obsessed with identity politics. It means I am better at reading you than you are at reading me.

>>19803341
>I'm not sure you understand who you are arguing with
True, I don't because this is anonymous. I presumed you were one of the two other people I was debating. I don't want to derail this topic to become about me or the presumed content of my character. My main issue with Abrahamic religions remain the same: That its soteriology hinges on faith in revelation that's treated as external from one's mind rather than penetrating the true nature of one's own mind; I would further argue the true nature of mind lies in the indeterminate border of existence and non-existence, which means it is empty (Shunyata), but regardless, skillful means (upaya) are only possible if you privilege the mind's capacity for awaking to its true nature over any clinging to any externalities, which naturally leads to the One Vehicle (Ekayana).

>>19803404
>awaking
awakening*
>over any clinging to any
over clinging to any*

>>19803404
>its soteriology hinges on faith in revelation that's treated as external from one's mind rather than penetrating the true nature of one's own mind
Yes there's an almost vicious sense of nihilism towards experience or consciousness in a system that merely demands you worship someone because someone else says so. I don't think you necessarily can troll such people into rejecting their beliefs so you may want to give the upaya thing more thought. There is tediously long discussion on what methods and knowledges a bodhisattva should aspire toward in the Asanga-Maitreya corpus of texts. I think these are almost all in English now as of the 2020s.

>>19803501
Do you have a lot of knowledge on Japanese Buddhism? I actually need some advice from someone who has a strong background in it. I was close to becoming a Soto Zen lay practitioner by accepting my Bodhisattva vows. However, I did not go through with it because of the overemphasis on proper lotus posture. I did sit in half Lotus for many, many hours, sometimes for days with intermittent breaks, but I noticed I would feel immense pain in my left knee a few weeks later. Many other longtime visitors also had to undergo knee surgery. Do you know if Rinzai is as concerned with formal lotus posture? I know Rinzai also places equal, if not more, emphasis on koan study from texts like the Blue Cliff Record or Joshu. Do you think sitting in a chair is a proper substitute so long as you use the cosmic mudra? I remember reading articles from Brad Warner, who received Dharma transmission from Nishijima, arguing that sitting posture in Burmese, seiza, or half or full Lotus is the only acceptable form of Shikantaza, and sitting in a chair is not acceptable. As a consequence, I always avoided the chair, but a part of me feels like the emphasis on sitting posture is merely a cultural relic and that only proper breathing is necessary. If I remember correctly, Kusan Sunim if the Korean Zen tradition would do more standing meditation.

>>19803018
Can you now post the verses that come right before and after and out yourself as a hypocrite? Thanks.

>>19803599
Not as familiar with Zen... but I remember reading once westerners have messed up posture anyway from our shoes and furniture (most people walk on their heels which is unnatural, and shit as if they are sitting in a chair, another unnatural pose that puts stress on different parts of your body, etc., ... needless to say I still use a normal toliet, but I have been commended by people in the past for my stride entering a room). So I would imagine those are contributing factors to not being able to easily take positions the sandal-clad Indians taught. A lot of these different methods of "do this peculiar thing for a while" have their roots in inducing meditative experiences anyway, so that is probably what is more important, like how a number of texts will declare for instance that mantras have no meaning, or that they mean the same thing as entities (i.e., they are empty)

>>19803642

>>19803649
ngl organic lemonade sounds pretty good

>>19803642
A very good post. Yes, I think inducing samadhi, the state of meditative absorption, is the predominant function of these various techniques. For this reason, I do not think it's advisable to praise the Lotus posture over other techniques such as lying, walking, standing, or sitting on a chair so long as one remains alert with mindfulness. I think what's most important is natural breathing, which is inextricably tied to one's state of mind, while being mindful, which involves moment-to-moment nonjudgmental awareness in order to pacify the "monkey mind".
However, this leads to the issue of authenticity versus degeneration of traditions when moving from one region to another. I think one can still be a genuine Buddhist without sitting in Lotus, but a lot of Soto Zen Buddhists like Nishijima and Brad Warner would vehemently disagree. I will have to look into other Mahayana traditions outside of Soto.

>>19803404
The content of your character is evident from the viciousness and rage with which you type. It should embarrass you that I assumed you were an actual bugman based on what you wrote. You are a terrible advertisement for Buddhism. If you've truly spent as much time reading about and practising this particular approach to consciousness change and spirituality, then it appears to have been a waste of time -- or at least to confirm it as demonic. You're the internet equivalent of the Zen-blessed Japanese soldiers tossing babies onto their bayonets.

>>19803810
>confirm it as demonic
You roleplay on the internet as a worshiper of a demon that lives in a volcano and demands that a foreign tribe sacrifice your race's babies to it.

>>19803762
Yeah there's lots of sects. I just read so can't advise you there

>>19803810
>you were an actual bugman based on what you wrote
I am not racist to Europeans, East Asians,
or Indians. They all have admirable writers, poets, and aspects to their long-lived cultural legacies. I simply despise Abrahamic traditions, yet you're the one consistently using racial slurs like "bugman". Modern China is a mess because of Mao's Communist Revolution, but it's not fair to judge their entire cultural legacy based on their deteriorated present state. When Narsieh, a Sassanian prince, fled from Arab invasions, he was allowed to settle in the Tang empire. He also admitted the Tang empire was more impressive than his own in many regards.
>Zen-blessed Japanese soldiers tossing babies onto their bayonets.
Meiji restoration had a lot of negative impact on Japanese Buddhist traditions, such as forcing monks to leave behind celibate life and become a part of the state apparatus, but I think Japan's Buddhist tradition is overall very impressive. However, I feel most of it, especially Dogen, is very difficult to translate, and I've heard even modern Japanese have difficulty understanding him much like Germans and Kant. I do think Dogen, Hakuin, and Ryokan were all special and enlightened figures, but one should be cautious in regards to what translations they pick and avoid jumping to conclusions.

>>19803943
You can't admire European authors and poets and hate Christianity.

>>19802899
Cope. The first progressives were christians, the first abolitionists, suffragists, anti-slavery paradists were all christians. The entire concept of human rights was built by christians. Read Dominion, as said before. Oxbridge and Ivy Leagues built progressive liberalism and all of them were dens of radical evangelism for all their history. Much like Christianity, the progressive revels in shunning ethnocentric identity in favor of a mutted globalized world that must bend the knee to his gospel of social justice and the betterment of humanity. The progressive revels in the same victim complex and self-inflicted suffering the early christians reveled in.

It's no coincidence the church is stacked to the brim with either pedophile rapists who are closet homosexuals and that the church today is the most cucked and liberal of all of the world religions out there.

>>19804121
These movements literally all have their roots in the Renaissance lmao, even fascism is liberal in nature because as it's post-Renaissance (as opposed to Monarchy)

thanks for confirming you have no idea about what you are talking about

>>19804138
>neofeudalists hate the renaissance
>neopagans hate the middle ages
like poetry

>>19803950
Why? That's an outrageous claim, and I am highly suspicious of anyone that claims such things.

>>19804161
Because Christianity shaped their way of thought and life for thousands of years? Because their faith was something precious to them? How can you claim to admire these people and then proceed to shit all over their religion of choice? It's absurd.

>>19804161
>anyone that claims
anyone who claims*

>>19804185
First, it's not hard to appreciate the writings of those you disagree with.
Second, you act like Europeans were a hive mind that single-mindedly worshiped Jesus prior to modernity. That is patently false. There is more complexity than the simple-minded image you're shilling.

>>19804232
Yes? Britain conquered the world "By Jingo!", they didn't do it citing Nietzsche, or Ragnar the Red or whoever the fuck /pol/ shilled to you this week.

>>19804241
>Britain conquered the world
They conquered the world due to better technology, tactics, and more, which is not causally reducible to Christianity. I would argue that Christianity was not necessary for the apogee of the British empire.
Also, the empire was largely parasitized and controlled by the Rothschilds, so it had its fair share of problems.

>>19804271
If anything Christianity came up as an afterthought following for instance, the nationalization of trading companies, or the seizure of Dutch/French/Spanish colonies, you'd have British missionaries going to India and Ceylon and Burma or wherever else. This activity really peaked in the 19th century, at which point the empire was mostly at its fullest extent anyway, and in fact translating Hindu and Buddhist scriptures had the opposite effect of converting Asia, it introduced Buddhism and vedanta to Europe. In fact, not even twenty years into the next century, when Britain conquers Palestine, it does not make George the King of Jerusalem, it gives the region to a different religious community entirely.

>>19804302
My initial claim is that I appreciate many European writers and aspects of their cultural legacy while holding a strong disdain for Christianity. I think it's disingenuous to reduce an entire cultural legacy to one strict interpretation of a complex tradition.
Finally, I find Unitarians all right, but most Catholics and Protestants I've encountered tend to reject that they're Christians. If I were forced to convert to one school of Christianity, I would to with that one because it at least makes the most sense. Beatrix Potter was also Unitarian fyi. g2g

>>19797322
This post makes me want to read Orientalism again

>>19799590
This is the thing that makes me a little suspicious of the Catholic faith. It's reminiscent of the pagan mother goddess cults. Also venerating women hasn't worked out so well lately.
>>19799991
Have any independent sources verified these claims? I'm open minded about miracles, provided there is solid evidence.
>>19800102
"It spreads because it's engineered to spread" is a tautology. What is it about the engineering of Abrahamism that is good at spreading?
Conversely, why couldn't Hellenistic pagans spread monotheism in spite of their greatest philosophers being able to prove it from first principles?
>>19800230
>Vatican III final fantasy cities
I can see the appeal of a futuristic Christendom, but it would have to completely undo all the liberalizing moves of the last few centuries in order to reunite Russia with the West. How would the Church build the consensus to achieve that?
>>19800254
You cannot enforce a human right (even a negative one) without imposing a duty on someone else. Even if you could prove that rights exist, I still wouldn't trust people who invoke them in political discussion. Honest people start from duties, and rights follow.
>>19800629
Any ideas on what will fill the vacuum? It feels like there is an opening for something sobering, but nothing has emerged yet.
>>19801858
Lets say, for argument's sake, all of that is true. How do you explain all of the Indians who, upon meeting missionaries and receiving the gospel, immediately recognized Jesus as an avatar? Surely their more advanced tradition of metaphysics should have allowed them to spot a fake religion designed to manipulate the masses. Also what do you think of the appearance of Isha Putra in Bhavishya Purana?
>Flavian family
>backed Christianity for complex geopolitical reasons, perhaps to pave the way for Feudalism and strip property rights
>Islam grew in Sassanian empire because some powerful and traitorous royal families were tired of the priestly caste's unbridled power
>and also probably saw some economic benefit in this course of action such as opening trade routes
This is the kind of thing I could see happening again in the next few hundred years. We basically have Roman late republic geopolitical conditions again, complete with latifundia, giant insulae and slipping control of satellite states.
>>19802414
>ancient talibs
As in Afghan scholars? Or is there another meaning of the word?
>"turning the other cheek", an unhealthy obsession with egalitarianism, and such are all extremely destructive to healthy cultures
In theory yes, although Christians have also managed to build feudal honor cultures based on revenge and hierarchy as the basis of justice. I suspect it has a lot to do with who is interpreting the scripture.
>>19802737
>and almost more accurate given baptismal rites and the etymology
What would be the significance of baptismal rites, from a Buddhist perspective?

>>19803092
>perfect meme
I agree, this is very admirable. I also wonder if it might also be the weakness of Islam, in that it needs to constantly expand. This is somewhat true of all empires of course, but Islam in particular appears to have trouble consolidating power and producing stable borders. Either the rulers expand beyond their reach or they compromise on the religion.
>>19803224
>I'm frankly not sure if islam will be able to swallow the poisonous frog that is europe.
I've pondered this myself, given that Western Nominalism has been able to swallow most other forces that opposed it.
>the character converts not out of any real sense of religious conviction, but for practicality and pussy
This is actually the factor that makes me suspect secularism will die soon. Even if most people are only larping their religion for the social benefits, that still leads to their children being raised in a religious environment. Children who attend weekly services and go to religious schools are more likely to grow up with the kind of faith they would actually live and die for.
>>19805106
You mean Edward Said's book? I haven't read it, so not sure how it connects to my post. Can you give a QRD?

>>19791810
What even is your source for this? It sounds like you're just making stuff up that helps you literally seethe more.

>>19804152
You can be a Neofeudalist and hate the Enlightenment without hating the Renaissance.

>>19803626
No response as expected.

>>19806217
You can be, but it is probably more logically consistent for them to criticize both.