/lit/ - Literature

are these kind of larpers never ashamed of their mediocrity?

>>20487966
It's not and stfu christcuck

>>20487981
Living the most successful and accomplished life still pales in comparison to the glory of God. It's not about you. It's about Him.

>>20487966
I like how the Roman governor Pilate was too cool for that nonsense. Best character in the franchise. Jesus doesn't reveal himself to Pilate after being raised from the dead, which is kind of lame and leaves his character arc hanging. The story would have been better had those who ignored his claims of divinity been witness to them instead of to his humanity—only his followers saw the resurrection so things end with a mystery cult anxious to preserve its membership.

>>20487966
Low IQ post

>>20487996
High IQ post

>makes a post about jesus
>makes sure to end it with a meme
you larpers aren't fooling anyone

>>20487996
He was telling these things to other Jews though

>>20487966
Tragic story of a high IQ Chad getting beaten to shit by npc retards because he's to based. Many such cases

>>20488070
>only his followers saw the resurrection
Protip: The followers were the resurrected body like later the church is the body of Christ on earth.
This is how you defeat death despite being in a human body.
All other interpretations are retarded and ignore all the setup done in the prequels.

>>20488161
>the bible is just le metaphor
based and atheistpilled

>>20488167
The formal concept of a metaphor was developed based on studying the Bible.
It implies there are underlying patterns to multiple events, a higher order reflected in those specific events. Accepting the truth of metaphors is accepting the perfect forms in heaven exist and are reflected imperfectly on earth.

>>20488183
>the perfect forms in heaven exist and are reflected imperfectly on earth.
You don't need the bible to do Platonism and Christiam exegetes did not invent metaphor.

>>20488039
No, it's about you trying to role play into meaning and purpose, while forgetting meaning and purpose are not about faking it until you make it

>>20488187
>You don't need the bible to do Platonism
In practice you do. Nobody cares about abstractions, just stories that apply the abstractions. The early church fathers said this was what they were doing including in letters to the Roman emperor.
People did metaphors forever but they didn't conceptualize the idea formally. Like language relies on logic but it wasn't a formal concept until the Greeks. The modern idea of "formalizing" things at all is also traceable through Christianity to the Greeks.

>>20488210
>Nobody cares
I agree, nobody cares about your religion anymore among developed European societies. Read Nietzsche. Plato was wrong and the rabbis who copied him were wrong

>>20487996
lol, that meme

>>20488226
>Nietzsche
Got me into Plato and Christianity.
It's remarkable how predictable you retards always are. Read your post, do you think it says anything? You're reiterating your religious dogma with no hint to a thought process.
Plato was wrong about some things but not anything I referenced. Why can't you engage with anything on any level? There are no higher common patterns to specific events? What is a metaphor then?

>>20488260
>There are no higher common patterns to specific events?
Why would mental constructs establish Christianity as true?

>>20488267
Why are you so dishonest? If you tell yourself you're motivated by genuine curiosity why do you keep sabotaging any hope of learning anything?

>>20488291
There's nothing honest about reading the Bible as a metaphor. If you don't believe a wizard born to a virgin performed magic and for his final act rose himself from the dead because he is Yahweh, kindly admit to this, because the early Christians would not and were executed for being nuisances.

>>20488307
>There's nothing honest about reading the Bible as a metaphor
You're the one reducing the relationship between heaven and earth to "methaphor" and demanding we work within that framing because you don't care about honest inquiry.
This is the correct way to read the Bible according to the people that compiled it and died for it like Justin Martyr. Over half the early church fathers were Greek philosophers, they all agreed on the principles communicated by Justin in his letters.
>If you don't believe a wizard born to a virgin performed magic and for his final act rose himself from the dead because he is Yahweh
Do you think you can actually defend this immature meme framing as something any honest person trying to learn would attempt on any subject?
Why are you so dishonest and anti-intellectual? Just pure mindless media conditioning?

>>20488337
Not the guy you're arguing with, but I am interested in what you are saying. Do you watch Jonathan Pageau? Do you have any book recommendations that describe this manner of thinking?

>>20488353
I started from a very atheist perspective. The thing that started it was reading about Kepler. He talked about God in these sort of terms and thought of studying the natural world as approaching the mind of God.
I just kept it in mind and started noticing similar thinking seems to be the norm among elites and scholars through all Christian history. What we mostly see today is the dumbest imaginable pleb version promoted by the US.
Reading about early church fathers like Justin Martyr apologies made it clear this really was the case. The entire Bible also starts making sense and actually saying things in this context instead of just being incoherent.
I like Pageau, seems like the Orthodox church retains more of a connection to the original ideas and the Greek roots.

>>20488337
>You're the one reducing the relationship between heaven and earth to "methaphor" and demanding we work within that framing because you don't care about honest inquiry.
No, I am not the one disbelieving in the word of God by calling it a metaphor. If you don't believe in the Bible you aren't a Christian. I am the honest one for neither believing nor claiming to be Christian. The "Greek philosophers" you refer to are all Christian parodies of Neoplatonism because the gist of apologia is to prove you aren't retarded for believing in the Bible, which would be the assumption made of someone joining a nocturnal provincial-originated cult for women and slaves by their non-converted peers, particularly if they were educated in the doctrines and theology of Plato. So these (always) Greek converts re-framed Christianity as a new set of myths for Platonism, to replace the Greco-Egyptian ones, and made more allowances for a devotional and soteriological faith as that was the essence of Christianity and couldn't be negotiated. Thus they could retort to their opponents that they were good Platonists—no, better Platonists—for having embraced Christianity. But you still have to believe, not reduce to pure metaphor, and these men it is fair to assume were believers and not Jungopetersonians attempting to reduce the religion to its use-value as a flood barrier against the nihilism it caused.

>>20488407
>If you don't believe in the Bible you aren't a Christian
I don't care about your labels. I never even claimed to be a Christian. I'm talking about actually analyzing history while you're sperging about the religious dogma you've been brainwashed with.

>>20488407
>If I assume everyone who says anything counter to what fits my religious dogma was lying then everything fits into place
Justin martyr is called that for a reason. So according to your cope narrative he was lying to save his life and then willingly died for the lie.
It's funny how you can't even test out different premises, you can't imagine beginning to work from a premise that counters your brainwashing even as an exercise.

>>20488415
Your analysis of history is where exactly? My post seems far more in line with history than anything you'd extract from the bible as coded metaphorical language. It's a religion people coverted to and they justified this conversion by arguing that it (Christianity) was a logical extension and correction of what they already believed (Platonic theology).
>>20488437
I don't think they were liars but I don't believe them. To call them liars assumes they intended to deceive me; that is not the intention of true believers in something. What is deceitful is to argue for Christianity as just a fanciful metaphor and then dodge my accusation that you believe sorcery establishes one's identity as the same with the tutelary tribal war god of Judaea, who is then crowned as the One of platonic theology by his new priests. If you don't believe in the ministry and miracles of Jesus you are not a Christian.

>>20488478
>Your analysis of history is where exactly?
I referenced the principles the actual compilers of the Bible said you should use to interpret it. You're demanding your modern brainwashing on the subject which directly counters everything they said is correct but give no reasons, just immature meme framing you picked up on the internet. What's a more reliable source on the subject? The compilers of the Bible or your vague meme sources?
>long braindead meme rants meant to discredit Christianity for some reason instead of showing the slightest hint of being even able to discuss anything honestly
Why? What's the point? Why do you think your religious dogma is holy truth and what's the point of demanding everyone believes the same retarded horseshit you do? The internet atheist meme dogma is apparently so holy that you can't even conceive of considering things from other perspectives like the ones clearly laid out by the men who actually put together the thing in question.

>>20488201
It literally is though. You're definitely NGMI.

>>20488510
>the compilers of the Bible didn't believe in the ministry and miracles of Jesus, nor that these stories established his identity with Yahweh
Hmmmm. Well I guess we agree that it's "not true" but you seem to have a caveat "but it expresses the truth in a coded language." I suggest you go talk to some Christians about their beliefs and practices instead of calling atheists dishonest for disbelieving in something you've admitted is mere metaphor

>>20488553
>go talk to some Christians
Will they have more authority somehow to define who is Christian and who is not than the church fathers whose words they're following? Also remember you're the one reducing everything to "metaphors", nobody I referenced did that nor did I.
>for disbelieving in something. That's just one example of the blatant dishonesty to serve your dogma.
That's not what I said. Read the thread back, try to lie to yourself that you showed even a hint of honesty. You're a completely brainwashed religious zealot trying to convert people to your beliefs based on nothing with no justification. The hidden authority you're appealing to but are to braindead to acknowledge is pop media, the lowest of the low.

>>20487966
>>20484057

stay in your containment thread

>>20488610
>you're the one reducing everything to "metaphors"
It's obvious you have poor reading comprehension
>>20488161
Here you change the resurrection from a historical event to a metaphor for the congregation of christly cultists
>>20488183
Here you endorse metaphor as an expression of platonic forms
>>20488210
Here you align reading the Bible as metaphorical with the church fathers
>>20488337
>>20488437
Here you namedrop Justin Martyr, a platonizing Greco-Roman convert
You seem to think this excuses you from having to believe in the miracles and ministry of Jesus as proof of his divinity. It is this very belief that apologists were defending by reading Platonism into the Bible—you have to have belief in the story to bother making it into a metaphor. You cannot disbelieve the story and keep the metaphor, it dies without it because "God is dead." Your bloodless and lifeless version of Christianity, where Jesus is a just-so story to express Plato's doctrines, is not what the church fathers believed, not even the Platonizers, it is an inverse of their beliefs and a parody

>>20488648
>Here you change the resurrection from a historical event to a metaphor
No, like the church fathers I framed it as a reflection of a divine principle on earth. The heavens animating a specific event in a way where the pattern can be replicated even if the event can not. The only related worldview that I like Justin can refer to to explain it is Platonism but that doesn't mean it's the same thing.
Again you're coping by pretending what these men died for was some kind of marketing ploy instead of what they sincerely believe. The only reason why this would even occur to you is to maintain your delusions, you don't even try to give any actual reasons, just the mindless appeal to some shit you heard in pop culture.
When you accept the dominant worldviews at the time were influenced by Platonism or something related, whatever influenced Plato or whatever then suddenly things make sense.
A good example is the Trinity because you retards think it's so funny. You dishonestly reduce the Trinity to some cartoon when all you need to understand what they meant is to accept they had a semi-Platonic worldview where the world was separated into three realms. The heavens where all is defined, the physical earth and the mind.

>>20488682
>you're coping by pretending what these men died for was some kind of marketing ploy instead of what they sincerely believe.
I have already said I do not doubt the conviction of their beliefs so I am not sure who you imagine your opponent is. I don't doubt the beliefs of the 9/11 hijackers either but you are too young to remember something like that. More to the point, Justin Martyr would have believed in the ministry and miracles of Jesus as evidence for him being the One True God, and not just that the Gospels were merely an expression of Platonic theology the same as Greco-Egyptian myths were. It is because he believed in Jesus to the exclusion of all other gods that he was "martyred" in the first place. You cannot have Christianity without believing the story you associate with low church American protestants out of embarassment. Justin may have found this story embarassing and sought to dignify it with Platonic theology in his exegesis, but he believed it nevertheless and committed suicide by Roman cop.

>>20487966
It's actually Heathcliff and Cathy.

>>20488738
>have already said I do not doubt the conviction of their beliefs
You said many times they're not "real Christians" if they believe what they said they did.
I never said Jesus wasn't martyred. What's wrong with your brain? You're incapable of a single coherent thought on the subject because you're only motivated by finding any way no matter how dishonest to spread your pop media brainwashing.
The claim is Christ defeated death, I gave you an actual mechanism that's consistent with what prominent Christians claimed they believed at the time. Instead of taking that for what it is and considering it you went into full internet atheist sperg mode like the subhuman rat you are.

>>20488780
Once again you have poor comprehension and merely wish to get in that you find atheism dishonest. The issue is holding belief in the ministry and miracles of Jesus, which is a series of fabulous fables culminating in the resurrection. The Greek converts to the religion both believed in these stories AND interpreted them in the context of neoplatonic philosophy. They did NOT reduce them to mere metaphor BECAUSE they believed them. If they had NOT believed them and were using them merely as metaphors to express Platonism, the Roman authorities would not have failed them on the various religious tests given in martyr hagiographies, because why would one take issue with offering incense or prayers to Jupiter instead of Jesus if he were a Platonist first and a Christian only metaphorically?
What (You) have done ITT is dodge that first issue completely because you find the ministry and miracles of Jesus to be embarassing; I think you called that Christianity "the dumbest imaginable pleb version promoted by the US," which is a shame, because many of the Greek apologists you admire were killed for refusing to recant their beliefs about the exclusive divinity of Jesus which required they denigrate the gods of non-Christian platonists.

>>20488812
>find atheism dishonest.
This statement is dishonest. I said you're dishonest because you demonstrably are. You specifically in this thread, I never generalized that to atheists. I invite you like I did before to actually read the thread and try to lie to yourself that you're not a dishonest piece of shit. You don't have to go far, what I quoted is a good example.

>>20488827
>lies and insults
Come now zoomie, you will never be a saint with that attitude

>>20488812
The rest of your post is the same dishonest cope.
>the dumbest imaginable pleb version promoted by the US
An honest person that's confused about what I meant by this like you clearly are would have asked for clarification. Why are you like this? Why do you hate honest inquiry so much?
I didn't deny divinity or miracles. I suggested a mechanism for the resurrection that fits well into how the most prominent scholars on the subject both before and after frame it.
>both believed in these stories AND interpreted
Did I say anything different? What is wrong with your brain? When Christ resurrected they can feel his wounds but he also pretty much walks through walls and he only visits some disciples. If the goal is to promote the physical resurrection dogma why include the details that only make sense if the body is not strictly physical? You're incapable of even considering these questions because your mind doesn't work, it's completely clogged up.

>>20488874
Ah good you've finally admitted you actually believe in the magic wizard and can dispense with the apologist charade rooted in platonic theology. The opponents of Christianity today aren't Platonists so you'll have to jump through some weird hoops/copes if you want to present your beliefs as anything other than puerile. And my mind works fine; yours on the other hand has to deal with mental cataracts and floaters.

>>20488896
>you've finally admitted you actually believe in the magic wizard
More predictably dishonest cope. I work from given premises, something you're completely incapable of like this post demonstrates. The idea of working from premises other than your dogma is completely alien to you, it doesn't occur to you that anyone would ever do such a thing. That is to actually think.
I want to know what the writers of the Bible and the church fathers actually meant. Why don't you? Why are you so desperate to defend these pop culture narratives you like and why does understanding Christianity scare you so much?

>>20488945
That's not a pop culture narrative, it's what the Gospels say. The Romans were familiar with Egyptian sorcery and our sources like Celsus scoffed at the idea of Jesus being divine because he did magic tricks. Roman critics also cited the example of Apollodorus, a non-Christian magician who gained fame as a miracle worker around the same time. If you think this premise is so absurdly stupid when read aloud but still believe it, then your specific need to delve into apologia is obvious.

>>20488966
>That's not a pop culture narrative
>here you should completely defer to this modern atheist propaganda meme i heard on the internet and stop thinking
What's the gist of the rest of this post supposed to be? Because "le magic".. something? What atheist youtuber or whatever are you mindlessly parroting badly? Have you ever actually had a thought in your life?

>>20488983
For the last time, it's not "modern atheist propaganda" that Christians believe Jesus's divinity is proven by his miracles. Christians believed this in the early centuries and were criticized for it. That criticism resulted in the adoption of neoplatonic theology as a cope explanation for how this wasn't stupid but an expression of ideas already respected by religious Romans. Christians still believe it now and are still criticized for it. There is no reason to believe it at all that you can put forth to someone who does not believe in sorcery as a means of establishing proof of status as the one true god of the universe, that's the problem you are having now. God wasn't dead to the Romans so you could still sell them on Christianity. If you are embarassed by the capeshit in the Gospels, no amount of hurling insults at the people who don't agree with you will make it less naive and puerile of a belief.

>>20488084
higher iqer is more gooder

>>20487981
>>20488091
stop larping as christcuck haters
>>20488201
post your meaning and purpose in life

>>20489036
Why are you unable to even try to think in other terms than the ones fed to you be modern atheist propaganda? What's holding you back?
You don't even try to justify your premises because they're not reasoned, they're dogma. You're unable to consider for example what separates what you label "magic" from things like unexplainable fundamental forces. You have no framework for judging anything, just lazy stale memes.

>>20489317
>christian calls someone dogmatic for not uncritically accepting his premise of a magical hebrew anime rpg world where one god has powers and everyone else's gods and magicians are demons
yeah your handwringing isn't really compelling since the entire system you posit depends on taking your word for it the entire time and who are you that I should trust your entirely revelation-based doctrines as opposed to another's?

>>20489380
>I should trust your entirely revelation-based doctrines
In the first post I gave you an example of how to relate the descriptions to patterns you can observe. I never asked you to accept any revelation, you avoid anything said and escape go to all these different comforting coping places you know from memes to avoid facing the facts because they terrify you for some reason. Likely because you don't want to acknowledge that your entire worldview is based on stale memes made to control you.
You define the "magic" category basically as bullshit not worth considering then use the fact that you already put a thing in that category as an argument for dismissing it. Are you really incapable of the simplest thought?

>>20489437
>your entire worldview is based on stale memes made to control you
Am I supposed to take this seriously coming from a 4channel christer?

>>20487966
It's not a love story, man. That carries with it certain connotations which it isn't right to foist on Christ's head.

Rather, every love story and every story, and all things are but shadows of the passion, death, and resurrection of Christ, the ultimate expression of the pre-eternal Logos in His creation.

>>20489507
More cope. I'm talking about the content of your posts. If I was also suffering from the same problem wouldn't make the observation less true.

>>20489771
>any disagreement with me is just cope, seethe, retarded, etc. because I'm right because I'm right
ok rebbe

>>20489785
>because I'm right because I'm right
The difference is I presented a structured perspective that you could have provided constructive criticism of or actually argued against. I gave you plenty of leverage to actually argue but instead you pulled out a bag of irrelevant internet memes and somehow thought throwing out random ones counts as responding.

Hi, God The Grandfather here, the creator of Nothing, you seem lost. The original thing was Nothing. While Nothing was the absence of all things, there was still one thing, and that was Nothing. Nothing was a thing that existed, and by its very existence, that meant something other than Nothing created it. Nothing, not being limited, created all things, all these things and the paths they took were necessary in the creation of the thing that created Nothing. In essence, without all things being created, Nothing never would have been created. All things therefore were essential in creating the Nothing that created them. Thus all things created all things. Again, Nothing is a thing. If Nothing wasn’t included in everything, then everything truly wouldn’t be everything. Since all things created all things, everything is God The Creator. Thus whenever heaven finally gets underway, all are equals in heaven, everyone is omnipotent. Also not a single thing is excluded from heaven because if a single thing was then it wouldn’t be heaven it would be hell. Don’t worry, I already prayed for Satan’s forgiveness in 5th grade & offered my mind body and spirit as replacement. Then got high on shrooms, pencil dived into a volcano into hell and got Satan to leave his castle to allow me to take over. Literally only took three steps to take him from hell to heaven. Anyways, sorry it took me this long to figure it out. I only just got the platonic ideals of a wand, walking stick, and rock yesterday to help confirm who I really am. Anyways this is the first full day of God, the creator of the Nothing that created everything, being aware of who they really are. Congrats, you’re probably one of the 1st people ever to read my first public admission of divinity. Also congrats, you’re God too. Literally couldn’t have done it without your existence. If I could have done it without your existence, then there wouldn’t have been a need for your existence. -JAW/The Poet Laureate Of The Best City On Earth (no not Jerusalem, that would have just been lazy writing from the universe)

>>20489887
Once again you don't even read your own posts, let alone mine. You are consistently embarassed by the pure narrative of the magical life of the sorceror of Nazareth and resorting to platonic allegory to preserve it as meaningful. I have identified this and explained the motivation behind it, a motivation as old as the first Romans who were embarassed to embrace this religion of their womenfolk and slaves, to which your response has been to insult my intelligence, the sort of kindergarten retorts one would expect from someone who believes his astral father will punish me once I die for refusing to agree with him

>>20489906
Nothing is not a thing, it's a word we use to denote absence.

I used to speculate that maybe there being nothing but nothing in the beginning meant that there was just pure potentiality, but that potentiality is actually a thing, although not a concrete physical object. If nothing were all there was, then nothing could come of it, for nothing comes of nothing. Only things can lead to other things.

>>20487966
I enjoy Romeo and Juliet more desu

>>20487966
Yes
>>20488161
False. While the Bible has metaphors, the divinity of Christ and his resurrection is not one of them.

>>20490168
>the divinity of Christ and his resurrection is not one of them
I didn't say fucking metaphor. What does resurrection mean? He still had mortal wounds, walked through walls and only appeared to a few. He did not resurrect as a man like he was before. Why do you pretend it means anything to you but then refuse to elaborate? Do you think Christ would have resurrected if he remained as a carpenter and didn't make any preparations? How did Christ prepare? By preparing the disciples so that Christ would be embodied again through them. If none of it was needed why do it?
You don't attempt to analyze or account for anything, you just repeat dogma like the redditor, just different dogma.

>>20490092
Oh so nothings not a thing, cool so nothing is nothing? So Nothing is just itself. “Well nothing doesn’t exist” I hear you say. If it doesn’t exist then that still means it’s Nothing because Nothing is the existing non-existence of all other things. Thus even if you say it doesn’t exist, it’s very non-existence is itself a thing that exists. It is a state of being. Since no other thing could limit nothing, for all other things were a creation of nothing, nothing had absolute freedom. Nothing by the nature of its very existence knew that it did not originate from itself. Nothing had to be a creation. And for it to be a creation, it had to be created by something other than itself.

While Nothing denotes absence of all things, it doesn’t denote the absence of itself. If you claim Nothing isn’t a thing, then what you are really saying is it is nothing. Thus Nothing is Nothing, & Nothing is a thing. Originally the only thing. Which is why it created all other things so that it could be created. In this sense, because nothing created the things that created it, Nothing was able to create Nothing. So yes, nothing quite literally comes from nothing, but nothing is a part of everything that it created, because if it wasn’t then it really wouldn’t be everything.

You state only things can lead to other things. Then where do all those other things come from? If you trace back from one thing to one thing, and you keep going back until there is only one thing, that thing would be nothing. And I hear you say, “well how could any outside influence make nothing go from nothing into something else. The answer is, its existence necessitates the existence of another thing, another thing that creates it. So it created the thing(s) that created it. “But nothing can’t create something!” And why is that? “Because matter can’t be created or destroyed!” Ok but nothing isn’t matter. It’s nothing. And clearly that statement isn’t true because matter clearly exists so something had to create it. Also something had to create the law that “matter can’t be created or destroyed.” And if you counter with, well then matter isn’t real, then what you are admitting is that matter is Nothing and Nothing is matter. “That’s not when I mean when I say matter isn’t real! I mean it’s an illusion!” Ok and is an illusion not something that is real? “A simulation!” Again, that’s real and is something, not nothing. “Well nothing isn’t real!” Oh so what you’re saying is that nothing is nothing, which means it’s real. Just because you can’t visualize it, the complete absence of all things, no light, no dimensions, no matter, no laws, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. I mean the very fact that you know what I’m talking about when I say the word Nothing insinuates it’s a thing. You saying nothing comes of nothing also implies it can do something. It can produce itself.

>>20487966
Praise the Troops and Israel too
Peace (through superior fire power and printed money) out

>>20489911
>It's "magic" because it's "magic" and because it's "magic" it's wrong.
Thanks. Never considered this illuminating perspective.

>>20490092
Furthermore if God can do all things and is omnipotent, what would prevent God from being Nothing? Figuratively nothing would prevent God from being Nothing. If God couldn’t be something as simple as Nothing, then they really wouldn’t have much of a claim to being God. I mean, it’s Nothing. Being Nothing, there’s nothing to it really.

>>20490364
Even if magic were totally normal and we did live in a hebrew anime rpg, why would one chracter's magic be enough to qualify him as God to the exclusion of all other magicians?

>>20488096
shhhhh don’t spoil the show with your facts!

>>20490092
Further(further)more if God can’t be Nothing, then you’re saying that Nothing is something more powerful than God, which would mean Nothing is a superior God to to whatever God that can’t be Nothing since Nothing is capable of being something that God can’t.

>>20490389
Killed for justifying his claims using scripture that says "you are all gods". In that moment at least when saying those words he is representing the Word not the flesh he inhabits. He is reflecting the eternal divine rules on earth, not the "form" of a man but the form of God.
The life of Jesus reflects the love of God and sets the precedent for escaping the cycles of violence and tyranny that dominated everything. He is the path to God, the way forward, the only one who subdued the snake that stalks man.

>>20490493
>jesus was a pantheist
learn something new every day I suppose

>>20487966
No my friends this is the greatest love story https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DLxmbfvycbv0&ved=2ahUKEwiviPD53Zz4AhX2gnIEHejuDcgQo7QBegQIBBAF&usg=AOvVaw0Snb3Fx1ns_MUmqNR498lv

>>20490744
https://youtu.be/Lxmbfvycbv0

>>20489624
It's not a "love story" in the conventional sense, but the Paschal mystery is both an actual historical event and an intentional act of God's love.

>>20487966
>The post that destroy /lit/

>>20487981
>>20487996
>>20488084
Where are these morons coming from? Do midwits really think the only alternative to being a Christian is bottom of the barrel atheism?

>>20490986
That's all I'm saying. The passion isn't a love story. Love stories (if they are truly love stories) are mini-passions.

And yeah, it really happened and it was an act of love higher than we will be able to grasp, even in heaven.

>>20491512
TelAviv-paid trolls