/lit/ - Literature

>>21196479
>The Qur'an is refuting the literal Bible
It doesn't refute shit.

>>21196479
Jordan went into that discussion trying to bring Abrahamic religions together. That fucking idiot Mohammed went into it trying to get Jordan to say "Christianity is wrong, Islam is correct."

You all worship the same God and read the same book, but you have to quibble over pointless distinctions of interpretation while religion itself becomes a thing of the past. Now would be the correct time for Christians, Jews, and Muslims to unite.

But it's not going to happen, because religious idiots these days take religion literally and fail to understand that it is and always was fiction. Very good fiction, that strikes at the heart of what it is to be human, but fiction nonetheless.

>>21196482
Respectfully, you're wrong.

>>21196479
OP here. In other words, there is nothing in the Qur'an or in Islam to please the materialist psychologist that Jordan Peterson is. Islam is on another spiritual level that Peterson cannot comprehend. He's a gaytheist just like Dawkins, except that he says "Well flying spaghetti monster makes some good points, even if he's fake." He believes in evolution and even left Christianity because of it (to be fair he was a young child).

>>21196504
That's also my problem with Jung.

>>21196495
Explain please

>>21196518
prove the Trinity.

>>21196479
the quran is bullshit french catholics made up

>>21196528
what do yo mean?

lmao

>>21196479
jbp is in lockstep to Mammon. look not at what he say but what he do

>>21196549
1+1+1=1

How?

>>21196479
>The only thing he likes about religions is the "psychological" aspect or the "self-help" aspect.
Duh. This was obvious from the start. The legitimisation of religion through the argument that religions reflect universal fundamental truths and archetypes is essentially anti-religious, because religion becomes only a reflection of truth (with relativistic caveats), and not truth that is justified by itself, i.e. by being true.
Same shit applies to perennialists.

>>21196583
Something like pic rel, I imagine.

>>21196583
How about 1x1x1=1.

But surely God defies explanation? Seems a bit presumptious that humans should be able to understand him.

>>21196619
>How about 1x1x1=1.
I guess there's only 1 apple in the picture.

>>21196583
Prove that their isn't a contradiction is saying that god is omnipotent and that such a thing isn't possible.

>>21196479
Who cares what Pseuderson thinks?

>>21196614
Dude, that's *literally* heresy.

>>21196630
No, because an Apple isn't God and isn't omnipotent, omniscient, or omnipresent.

>>21196630
You're talking about the material 3D plane. God is not an object.

>>21196637
How come?

>>21196638
>▶
I've had this discussion here many times before. Muslims don't understand omnipotence as a concept.

>>21196490
what do you think will happen to you when you die

>>21196479
All the Abrahamic religions are stupid but Islam is the dumbest of all.

>>21196639
>>21196638
So why did >>21196619 even refer to the Trinity as a group of countable units?

>>21196568
what the fuck

>>21196643
>>21196632
Are you two actually retarded? There's a difference between a singular/unified omnipotence and the Trinity. The Trinity doesn't make an argument for omnipotence of a singular God, it talks about THREE DISTINCT PERONS. Not even a single Christian scholar using omnipotence as a explanation/argument for the Trinity. Even within a polytheistic paradigm you could have multiple omnipotent Gods. Zeus could be omnipotent, Aphrodite could be omnipotent, Poseidon could be omnipotent etc.. that doesn't suddenly make them all one singular monotheistic God you retards.

>>21196649
Same thing that happened before I was alive presumably. I honestly don't know, but here's the kicker, neither do you.

Anyway, if God does exist in the Christian sense and he sends me to hell for not sucking his cock in his house every Sunday. Then I think he's a cunt anyway. I'm a good person, and if that's not good enough, then fuck your replacement daddy.

>>21196482
>It doesn't refute shit.
It is the restored Monotheistic faith of Abraham and the prophets, but it is unique in that it claims Mohammad to be the last and final prophet. That the Quran is the direct word of Allah/God, not the gospel written by disciplines of the man who preached it but directly spoken to Mohammad by God who then spoke it aloud for his kinsmen to record directly. It refutes the bible by saying it is now updated and no longer relevant as the Torah is no longer relevant to Christians, so too is the bible no longer relevant to Muslims.

>>21196549
>>21196583
>>21196614
>>21196630
It is polytheism by the back door.

>>21196632
Picrel

I wonder with Peterson asking questions of Christians and Muslims, will dare ask one about the Jews?

>>21196670
idk I don't think this level of pride is healthy or good person-y.

>>21196652
Countable units aren't the same thing as objects. And claiming the omnipotence of a being doesn't preclude such an expression. Your response is literally meaningless.

>>21196672
>directly spoken to Mohammad by God who then spoke it aloud for his kinsmen to record directly.
like Jesus and His disciples did?

>>21196669
No Christian says that the Holy Trinity is three distinct persons. They're all God, each of them is separate from each other though. The Father is not the Son is not the Holy Spirit, but they're all God.

>makes mudslimes seethe and squirm
Your religion is spurious and satanic, Mohammed.

>>21196672
If you're a Muslim brother than slight correction as the Quran was directly spoken to the angel Gabriel who then spoke it to the Prophet.

>>21196683
>Countable units aren't the same thing as objects.
In this case they are obviously conceptualised as such. There's one Father, etc. - and what is that Father that can be described with a number if not an object? A quantity?
>Your response is literally meaningless.
As opposed to >>21196583 multiplying different things together?

>>21196687
The bible was not recorded in Jesus' lifetime. It was recorded until around 180 A.D, at the earliest. It was recited orally for two to three generations. You stupid fuck.

>>21196694
Can anon say that??

>>21196669
There can't be more than one omnipotent being.

>>21196692
>No Christian says that the Holy Trinity is three distinct persons
Lmao. Retard. Actually learn your own spastic religion.
>The Christian doctrine of the Trinity (Latin: Trinitas, lit.'triad', from Latin: trinus 'threefold')[1] defines one God existing in three coequal, coeternal, consubstantial divine persons:[2][3] God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ) and God the Holy Spirit, three distinct persons
>three distinct persons
>THREE DISTINCT PERSONS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity
Denying that is heresy your retard. You've literally admitted that a central point of the Trinity is illogical and you need to deny it and fall into heresy for it to make sense ahahaha
See this is the thing, a lot of you faggots can't even comprehend how illogical this belief is

>>21196698
I'm not, but I do prefer the creed of Mohammad as more vital than meek multiculturalism of Christianity and the sheer kikery of Judaism.

>>21196710
>wikipedia

>>21196672
>adam used latin loanwords in the garden of eden when he was speaking the original language of humanity, classical arabic
lol

>>21196702
This is incorrect.

>>21196490
This IS what's happening, it's called Noahidism. The question is how the Jews are going to manage to combine the three streams with the least friction. Stuff like the tubby queer in OP's video are a step towards it.

>>21196702
Exactly. So saying God is so omnipotent that he can be three distinct persons is a illogical. Hahaha, glad you agree.

>>21196712
Islam is multicultural and mean/violent. The worst of both worlds. Enjoy.

>>21196700
Calm down, man, what's your problem? Anyway we don't actually know this with certainty. And there's plenty of books we do know were written by disciples, like Paul's. https://www.history.com/news/who-wrote-the-bible
>>21196712
You just care about whatever is politically convenient than spiritual truth.

>>21196713
Here you go faggot
http://catho.org/9.php?d=bxw#bpd
But you keep squirming loool

>>21196669
>Are you two actually retarded? There's a difference between a singular/unified omnipotence and the Trinity.
Geunine opmnipotence makes either possible. You're just splitting hairs to justify placing restricitons on god. Just admit that you don't believe in the possibility of omnipotence.
>God, it talks about THREE DISTINCT PERONS.
But it sill claims that they are the same entity or whatever.
>Not even a single Christian scholar using omnipotence as a explanation/argument for the Trinity.
That's because Christians have to justify a lot of other things to validate their scripture. But I'm not arguing for Christianity; I'm criticizing Islam. I'm demonstrating that the Islamic criticism's of the trinity demonstrate a damning contraindication within their conception of god.
>Even within a polytheistic paradigm you could have multiple omnipotent Gods. Zeus could be omnipotent, Aphrodite could be omnipotent, Poseidon could be omnipotent etc.. that doesn't suddenly make them all one singular monotheistic God you retards.
That's just not true. If any gods are able to control another in any way, then they cannot be omnipotent. If they are all equally capable, and it is time (in the sense of which one acts first) that exerts on them, than they still aren't omnipotent as time is the governing factor which precludes them from being omnipotent. Just typing that sentences shows that you don't have a coherent or meaningful conception of omnipotence, let alone a belief in one.

>>21196694
>The Satanic Verses are words of "satanic suggestion" which the Islamic prophet Muhammad is alleged to have mistaken for divine revelation.[1] The verses praise the three pagan Meccan goddesses: al-Lāt, al-'Uzzá, and Manāt and can be read in early prophetic biographies of Muhammad by al-Wāqidī, Ibn Sa'd and the tafsir of al-Tabarī.
>The incident is accepted as true by some modern scholars of Islamic studies, under the criterion of embarrassment, citing the implausibility of early Muslim biographers fabricating a story so unflattering about their prophet.

>>21196672
>It is polytheism by the back door.
Your Islam is just atheism by a different name if you believe that.

>>21196728
>a mortal man
>defining the limits of omnipotence
I'm afraid that you simply don't get it. Omnipotence means, by definition, that they can do whatever they want. One omnipotent being could even be multiple totally separate entities that have no overlap what so ever. Why? Because it's omnipotent.

Abrahamic religion puts these gay caps on what the divine can do so that you can play gay word games and pilpul eachother about the precise manner in which you are supposed to mutilate your genitals, but the simple fact is that an omnipotent entity can do whatever it wants. An omnipotent entity can do everything, including exist alongside other omnipotent entities. To argue otherwise is to deny that it is omnipotent, because if it can't exist alongside other omnipotent entities, then it is by definition not omnipotent, as there is something that it cannot do.

>>21196728
>Geunine opmnipotence makes either possible. You're just splitting hairs to justify placing restricitons on god. Just admit that you don't believe in the possibility of omnipotence.
No it doesn't. omnipotence doesn't include logical absurdities. This going back to that retarded midwit teenage atheist argument of "Can God make a rock so big he can't move". No serious atheist that understands logic makes these argument because they know it's retarded because it's an absurd meaningless statement. Like a short tall man, like a squared circle. Within the discipline known as logical these are meaningless statements.

>>21196745
>omnipotence doesn't include logical absurdities
Yes it does. By definition, it does.

>>21196721
Violence is strength anon, and I don't see any of the poorer nations earning high positions in other richer Muslim countries. It enforces hierarchy and authority. I can respect that and would enjoy a similar situation in the West.

>>21196723
>what's your problem? Anyway we don't actually know this with certainty.
My problem is your faith is build on misdirection immediately from the beginning, we have not even opened the book and already there is unknowns. Jesus' disciples were illiterate, nor did they speak the language it was originally written in.

>You just care about whatever is politically convenient than spiritual truth.
No, I care about Blood & Soil. Christianity does not. Judaism is a closed ethno-religious group though Islam, despite the many disagreements I have with it does share many of the values that could make Europe strong and it's people vital.

>>21196741
>Omnipotence means, by definition, that they can do whatever they want
Yes but the thing they "do" needs to actual mean something. Can God ahdkjhfdasjkhfdsa? What's "ahdkjhfdasjkhfdsa"? it's meaningless bullshit. The same with all these other absurdities that people think up that don't understand formal logic.

>>21196748
>Violence is strength anon
Depends. It can also be weakness. Power is always strength.

>>21196746
No it doesn't you spacker. You don't understand linguistics nor logical. As I stated here >>21196749 asking if God can "do" any number of absurd things is exactly the same to asking any other meaningless gibberish like "Can God asdfhuajskhf234324?" It means nothing.

>>21196749
Why would you assume that an omnipotent being would be bound by the wordgames that a human mind can come up with? Omnipotent beings are omnipotent. They can exist in dimensions that you can't conceive of. Does your formal logic account for seven temporal dimensions, four of which do not have unidirectional arrows of time? No? Well, there you go.

>>21196754
>brainlet mortal getting stumped by THE POWER OF ZEUS
mortCELS seething at the altar of the divineCHADS

>>21196745
>omnipotence doesn't include logical absurdities.
>My god is governed by the laws of logic
>But he's like totally omnipotent.
The base-line for omnipotence is the ability to transcend things the laws of logic and number
>inb4 logic is part of/an extension of god's nature
>of course my god can't alter his nature, that would be absurd
>but he's still totally omnipotent.
>This going back to that retarded midwit teenage atheist argument of "Can God make a rock so big he can't move".
Not really. I would claim that such paradoxes are the projection of human limitation onto an omnipotent being.

>>21196757
You don't understand what you're saying, because if you're affirming absurdity, which is literally what you're doing here, then literally every single conversation we have is totally and utterly meaningless. If you're saying absurdity is valid then the discussion we are having right now, with the words we're constructing in the sentences we are, it's totally meaningless. Everything I just said above is as equally valid as me saying lkjasdhfkjdsahfkdjaslhflk;asd lkasdjflkdsa jf aslkdjflkdasjf

This the problem with midwits like you, your woefully uneducated on basic aspects of logical and philosophy yet think you can engage in theological discussions. Classical atheists would be embarrassed of you

>I studied the Koran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad. So far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself.

>Muhammad brought down from heaven and put into the Koran not religious doctrines only, but political maxims, criminal and civil laws, and scientific theories. The Gospels, on the other hand, deal only with the general relations between man and God and between man and man. Beyond that, they teach nothing and do not oblige people to believe anything. That alone, among a thousand reasons, is enough to show that Islam will not be able to hold its power long in ages of enlightenment and democracy, while Christianity is destined to reign in such ages, as in all others.

>>21196772
You didn't answer the question: Why would you assume that an omnipotent being would be bound by the wordgames that a human mind can come up with?

>>21196772
>Everything I just said above is as equally valid as me saying lkjasdhfkjdsahfkdjaslhflk;asd lkasdjflkdsa jf aslkdjflkdasjf
If an omnipotent god willed for such a thing to be valid and meaningful, then it would be. Just as they are capable of every possible answer to a paradox in a way they wish. Omnipotence must entail the capacity to transcend logic, if this includes the affirmation of absurdity, then yes they must be capable of it.

>>21196761
You don't know what you're saying you spacker. Literally the word omnipotent, even by the retarded definition you're using, is bound by SOME kind of logic. If you're saying it's meaningless when discussing God that you're saying even YOUR definition of God being omnipotent is meaningless. Saying "God is governed by laws of logic" and understanding it requires...LOGIC. Fucking retards. You literally cut the legs off your own arguments and effectively say everything is pointless and meaningless. You don't know how to argue lol

>>21196790
>. Literally the word omnipotent, even by the retarded definition you're using, is bound by SOME kind of logic.
see >>21196779

>>21196748
Oh, so you're a racist schizo looking for a religion to justify your insanity. Yeah Christianity isn't for you. And neither is Islam for that matter, but whatever.

>>21196753
Violence is the font from which all authority comes from, if you have no capacity for violence you have no means of authority. Your Justin Trudeau 'violence can be a weakness' is simply (Classical) Liberal excuses meant to undermine actual authority.

why do wypipo take these desert religions so seriously

>>21196779
You're literally bounding God to a word game by calling him so omnipotent that he could make a rock so big he couldn't move or any other retard shit you want to say constitutes omnipotence. That's my point you retard. You can't make these arguments and think it's possible to have ANY meaningful discussion. Like I said it'd be like saying akjdhfdkjashfdkasjlhfdas. You're arguing from absurdity which makes everything we say, every word we type, meaningless.

>>21196795
That's not very logical of you, spacker. You should know better than to use meaningless gibberish, what with your vast knowledge of formal logic.

>>21196810
See >>21196779

>>21196811
what

>>21196799
Like I said, it depends. Also, you mistake capacity of violence with violence itself. Muslims are violent but they have no power.

>>21196795
The idea that being racist is some sort of mental disorder is truly the most damning result of Liberal thought, the rest of the world is and always has been deeply motivated by what we call racial bias. No creed of Abraham is for me, I will admit that openly, what I want is not compatible with any of the religions we have today.

Do not mistake me though, there are many Christian thinkers and men whom I do admire. Many artists, thinkers and more who proudly wore their Christianity openly. Picrel I do amdire.

>>21196787
But I'm saying it's not been willed to be so since we clearly don't deal in absurdity. If you think we DO then this discussion is LITERALLY by DEFINTION meaningless, it's beyond amazing that you can't comprehend that. That fact you ascribe meaning to the words I'm saying means we don't deal in absurdity

>>21196818
>Muslims are violent but they have no power.
Not one single media cooperation will print a picture of their Prophet, not one single police group investigated the child grooming rings for fear of being called out. Think about what you are saying.

>>21196817
He's your typical midwit anon spacker that thinks everyone in a thread is the same person.
>>21196811
Hey faggot I'm over here you troon. It's perfectly possible for two different people to find your posts retarded

>>21196790
>Literally the word omnipotent, even by the retarded definition you're using, is bound by SOME kind of logic.
>Yous said this this thing transcends the laws of logic
>But it must be bound by SOME logic because I say so.
Can you even read. Do you understand the words that you're reading, because if this is your response, then you probably don't
If your answer is that we're using logic to discuss the topic, that still doesn't mean anything because the logic is being use to point out the limitations of logic when it comes to this subject, which is something well within logic's capability.
>Saying "God is governed by laws of logic" and understanding it requires...LOGIC.
I'm saying that a full understanding of him isn't possible as omnipotence entails I guess things/actions/etc. that are beyond or transcend logic. Like you just didn't understand my argument and you still typed all of that. What is wrong with you?
The only person cutting the legs off of their arguments is you because putting limitations of logic on the concept of omnipotence is a damning contradiction.

>>21196822
yeah you like the most generic /pol/ Christian ever what a surprise. i really needed you to spell it out for me.

personally, I love Jesus

>>21196837
>personally, I love Jesus
Personally, I love my family, my land and my people. Jesus is the creed of the slave.

>>21196835
>I'm saying that a full understanding of him isn't possible as omnipotence entails I guess things/actions/etc
No you retarded your argument isn't just giving a limited/incomplete understanding of God, it's making it IMPOSSIBLE to understand God on ANY level. That's the point here you retard. Saying God encompasses absurdities means he's meaningless you fucking retard. Like I said it's akin to askjdfhdksajhfdaksjhf.

>>21196840
There is a power not based on violence. Which is why the second they lose the ability to manipulate they suffer horrific violence every time.

>>21196841
>my people
/pol/tard spotted

>>21196841
I
LOVE
YOU
JESUS(ah)
CHRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĮĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪ

>>21196845
We will never lose again. We're here to stay.

>>21196857
You're about to lose, very badly, Mohel.

>>21196825
>But I'm saying it's not been willed to be so since we clearly don't deal in absurdity.
Okay, That's fine but irrelevant to the conversation. The discussion of omnipotence is one about capability and possibility, not about the current state of things.
That's why I expressed myself like this:
>If an omnipotent god willed for such a thing to be valid and meaningful
When you respond by saying this:
>>But I'm saying it's not been willed to be so since we clearly don't deal in absurdity.
I shows you either trying to change the conversation or you don't understand this.
What's worse is that you're trying to reduce this to what "we (don't) deal with" rather than what an omnipotent being deals with. Again, this indicates that you're totally misunderstanding the conversation here.
I feel bad having to pick you apart like this, but you really don't seem to understand how to read an argument.

>>21196844
>No you retarded your argument isn't just giving a limited/incomplete understanding of God, it's making it IMPOSSIBLE to understand God on ANY level.
No, it is saying the former and not the latter.
>hat's the point here you retard. Saying God encompasses absurdities means he's meaningless you fucking retard. Like I said it's akin to askjdfhdksajhfdaksjhf.
Not at all saying that he's capable of encompassing what we think of as absurdities is the acknowledgement of his omnipotence at the most basic level. Projecting limitations based on our understanding of god is the denial of an omnipotent being. that you think what is meaningful or meaningless to us at any given moment has any bearing on this is the only absurdity going on in this conversation.

>>21196479
>The Qur'an is refuting the literal Bible
Yeah and my DFW x Socrates gay fanfiction refutes both

>>21196833
>He's your typical midwit anon spacker that thinks everyone in a thread is the same person.
This guy has no reading comprehension, so it wouldn't surprise me that he lacks the ability to differentiate between different posters within a thread.

>>21196479
Islam has only ever lost to Christianity militarily, and that was most true when Christians were least devout. Although neither position is correct, the Muslim does not have to prove that 3 is equal to 1.

>>21196940
>Although neither position is correct, the Muslim does not have to prove that 3 is equal to 1.
Yes, but it does have to prove that its god is omnipotent while simultaneously being incapable of transcending the laws of number. I think falling for this is the ultimate sign of being a dimwit.

>>21196947
If Muslims believe God acts within reasonable and ordered laws then that is a good thing to believe, for the theist. If God is, however, a capricious wizard who overturns reality on a whim so that up is down and day is night, then I'm not sure what you are defending or why you'd place any "faith" in this entity at all.

>>21196947

>>21196799
Violence can't grow crops. Violence can't make good food. Violence can't raise children, can't build, and can't do any other activity that makes life possible and worth living. Most damning of all, violence can't compel someone.
Christianity was not strengthened by the violence inflicted on it, but by the defiance of the martyr, both of Christ and his followers, flourished.

>>21196972
Violence protects all of those.

>violence can't compel someone
You don't truly believe this, do you?

>>21196986
>Violence protects all of those.
No, power does.

>>21196962
>If Muslims believe God acts within reasonable and ordered laws then that is a good thing to believe, for the theist.
I guess if they're willing to change the subject when challenged, then this would be a suitable response, but a discussion about omnipotence is about possibility and capability rather than what the current state of things is. When you try to change it about the current state of things in the world, you're changing the topic of conversation. What you said was irrelevant to my assertion. It's an attempt to start a different conversation. Now answer my question. How can this being they call god be omnipotent if he is incapable of transcending the laws of mathematics/quantity/logic/etc.?
>>21196966
No Muslim has ever given me anything resembling an answer to this question. Not one, and I mean it. They either change the conversation, repeat the same refuted points over and over, or go into spastic fits.

>>21196989
Come on now, anon.

>>21196986
>Violence protects all of those.
From other violence. Very circular, no? What is the point of a tool which is only used to defeat itself? It is an expedient, not a good end onto its self.
>You don't truly believe this, do you?
Yes, I do. It is a matter of historical record. People have gone through tortures and to their deaths, not recanting their beliefs. Do I believe that no one can be compelled by violence? No. Do I believe that there are those who cannot be compelled? Yes. I would have to throw out a lot of history to disbelieve that.

>>21196996
What?

>>21196672
We Christians don’t really care if it isn’t “monotheistic” by your made up terms.
Many Jews believed in at least two powers in heaven that were the same God prior to Jesus’ incarnation.
Saying that the one God cannot be three persons is limiting God and putting Him into your own box and is close to blasphemy.
Your “prophet” was nothing more than a man who couldn’t even tell the difference between Satan and an angel from the Lord.
You need to stop worshipping him as you clearly do.

>>21196998
>What is the point of a tool which is only used to defeat itself?
Are you using the tool on yourself? Are you applying violence to your fields? Your family? A complex mathematical formula? No, of course not. The tool is an important one, the most important one because without it you are always at risk of somebody with it. You deny that because we have lived in a peace unknown to the world, we have come to believe that the bubble we occupy now has always been there and will always be there.

You cast down your sword and hammer them in to plowshares only to realize that it was that sword that kept the enemy over the hill.

>>21196995
>How can this being they call god be omnipotent if he is incapable of transcending the laws of mathematics/quantity/logic/etc.?
You're both wrong. It's a stupid conversation. Bald men arguing over a comb. My point—which is what I care to express—is that their theology is less stupid. The one God is one person, not three, and he is a lawgiver God, not a lawbreaker God. Christianity never really could digest all the Hellenic thought it swallowed. In the long run it came down with food poisoning and now only really thrives in societies where people were shamans or animists a week ago, because your idea of God is worse than a Marvel character.

>>21197019
Just because I find something undesirable does not mean I do not understand the necessity for it.
What I take issue with, and I apologize if I have misinterpreted your stance, is making violence/strength/power the only virtue, or the prime virtue. We must begin with the plowshares before we have anything worth defending with swords.
You use the Spartan shield here. Those were foreigners, who compelled a native population to labor as slaves to provide them with their daily bread. This is not the opinion of a biased outsider, but the opinion the Spartans held of themselves. What use are their virtues, when the firmament of their society is built on the enslavement and death of others? They were not defending their own fields, they were defending the fields they held in bondage.
Is that a society to emulate?

>mistaking violence with power
Rape threats against their wife and their wife getting raped are the same thing in the mind of these people.

>>21197037
>The one God is one person, not three, and he is a lawgiver God, not a lawbreaker God.
Demonstrating the capability to transcend a law isn't breaking, it's more just being beyond them. If god himself were bound by the laws he imposes upon the universe, he wouldn't really be much of a god. That you cannot imagine a god that is beyond the laws he gives says more about the limitations of your thinking than anything else.
Everyone one of your claims comes from a conception of omnipotence that is arbitrarily limited.
>because your idea of God is worse than a Marvel character.
I'm not a Christian. I'm just someone who thinks the claims Muslims make about the trinity say more about them than they do about Christianity. I'm just pointing out what it says.

>>21197040
>Just because I find something undesirable does not mean I do not understand the necessity for it.
I get that and I am trying to find common ground here with you, but either we fundamentally disagree with each other or, and I hope this second one is the case, we are misunderstanding each others position.

>Your stance is making violence/strength/power the only virtue, or the prime virtue
This is my stance, the prime virtue from which all other virtues can be enacted from. Yes. Loyalty, honor, courage, all stem from the capacity to do violence. I am not saying that a society build entirely on violence would be desirable, but one that placed the ability to enact controlled violence is always infinitely better than one that can not. And more likely to produce stability. When I say this, I do not mean the individual but the collective, be it in the form of a military or a dedicated force. That force must occupy the top position of a hierarchy, either alone or jointly.

>We must begin with the plowshares before we have anything worth defending with swords.
I disagree and place these second behind the sword. For without the sword the plowshares are taken by those with swords, as in the case of Sparta.

>Is that a society to emulate?
Aspects of it, most definitely. But I think that is a discussion for another time.

We must begin with the plowshares before we have anything worth defending with swords.

>>21197067
>That you cannot imagine a god that is beyond the laws he gives says more about the limitations of your thinking than anything else.
I mean, I'm not retarded, so I don't confuse what I can imagine what what is possible, let alone actual. And again, both theologies are entirely wrong, so I don't have a sky horse in this otherworldly race. It's just that if God does not follow any law or course whatsoever you have no reason to reify him, let alone deify him. He is complete chaos. He is a black void. He is the inversion of all that holds on earth. Which is, of course, exactly what christers wanted, going back to the days of Roma.

>>21197089
>I mean, I'm not retarded, so I don't confuse what I can imagine what what is possible, let alone actual.
I agree. But I still think my way of thinking entails a more complete understanding of omnipotence as a concept than yours. I ultimately would deny the existence of an omnipotent being, but if one did exist it would have to be capable of what the Christians say their god does and not limited in the way Muslims say their god is.

>>21197080
I do believe our differences here are small, and I am only quibbling over a matter of emphasis.
Yet, I wish to point out to you that when a dike is constructed to defend a city from flooding, we do not call the dike more important than the city. It is subordinate to the city. It is true that without the dike, there would be no city, but without the city, what is the point of the dike?
The warrior/soldier/violence-doer is in a similar position: he should be subordinate to the makers of things which he defends. If the soldier must be sacrificed to save the farmer, that is proper. The farmer should not be sacrificed to save the soldier, anymore than the city should be taken apart to build a higher dike.

>>21197115
>if one did exist it would have to be capable of what the Christians say their god does and not limited in the way Muslims say their god is
the problem with the Christian version, as I see it, is you still have a God who just does whatever, but at the same time the religion promises a covenant with him made through the blood sacrifice of his son/himself... to himself. So how do these pieces fit together? You've made a pact with someone who is not bound by any law? Why? If the Christian is correct, you've made a one-sided plea for favor, which is in some sense exactly what the pagan rituals did.

>>21197118
>>21197080
Read The Republic.

>>21196479
>He will say something like "Well the Bible makes good observations that apply to human life, so it's true."

It’s called pragmatism. Read William James.

>>21197118
>It is subordinate to the city. It is true that without the dike, there would be no city, but without the city, what is the point of the dike?

The protects against accidents, nature can be fickle but it does not sit and plan. I think this is a case of apples to oranges. The Warrior/soldier is always on guard for danger from every quarter and as such should be afforded the highest position in society.

> If the soldier must be sacrificed to save the farmer, that is proper.
Agreed. And it is because of this that they occupy the highest positions of the hierarchy.

>he should be subordinate to the makers of things which he defends
I do not understand this position, to place the defender under that which he defends compromises the ability of the defender. It it tantamount of having a woman, in the family, decide when her husband can defend. By the time it comes for her to say, it is already to late, the threat is too close.

>The farmer should not be sacrificed to save the soldier.
Fully agree, the farmer is the lifeblood of the people/polis and it exactly why the warrior precedes the farmer in the hierarchy. For the farmer may endanger the entire city by his actions.

>anymore than the city should be taken apart to build a higher dike
This implies a finite resources. You do not take apart one to furnish the other, though sometimes the two do overlap the Peasant-Soldier of Central Europe springs to mind.

Pic unrelated, I just like posting images on an imageboard.

>>21197140
>You've made a pact with someone who is not bound by any law? Why? If the Christian is correct, you've made a one-sided plea for favor, which is in some sense exactly what the pagan rituals did.
Since I believe that that for god as he is claimed by Abrahamics must be above and beyond the laws he creates and gives, I think that's the best you can do. At that point you must evaluate the arguments and evidence put forth by that god's followers.
Every faith will have it's own version.
I'm like you in that I don't have a dog in this race, but I've noticed that Muslims tend to be very arrogant when it comes to discussing religion and that they tend to overlook some of their own weaknesses. I just think the Islamic response to the trinity shows a real lack of critical thinking applied to their own position, and I think it should be pointed out to them.

>>21196748
you like islam because "violence is strength"?

>>21197222
No. I rate Islam higher than Christianity and Judaism because wherever it spreads to it implements a strict hierarchy that is seldom subverted by local politics. I do not like it, i do not like any of the creeds of Abraham.

>>21196479
Yes, and Book of Mormon refutes everything else.

>>21196583
Isn't it 1=1=1=1?

>>21197229
even if it means the complete stagnation of the economy, science, basically all things and the general torpor of society as a whole?

>>21197217
>lack of critical thinking applied to their own position
It's not something they have to do, so they don't. Muslim "philosophers" were disproportionately Persian or "Andalusian," which is to say they came from non-Islamic backgrounds and converted into the religion, or their recent ancestors had. Early Christianity had a similar situation—hardly any great Galilean writers! With Abrahamic theology, any philosophy has to be captured from the outside and brought in as a servant to the faith. I suspect if any rigorous Muslim apologia are to be written in response to Christianity, they would have to be written by Western converts. But the default Western way of life is unphilosophical and the marginal converts to Islam are exactly that, marginal and unphilosophical.

>>21197239
Strict is not synonymous with immovable or impregnable. A strict vertical hierarchy offers more dynamic action and growth than a horizontal one. That is why every successful military, every successful company, every successful nation has an executive office. Why a fire-team has one leader and a 2IC.

Your argument is stagnant.

>>21197253
the leaders of the nation containing the most sacred site in all of islam hold regular pissing and shitting orgies behind closed doors

your religion is stagnant

>>21197283
I'm not a Muslim and have said so several times.

>>21197289
you'll keep saying that until muslims arrive en masse to your country and then you won't have much of a choice

>>21197283
This is akin to the whole muh Vatican pedos argument. I’m not a Muslim btw I just think there are stronger cases to be made against Islam, mainly what >>21197239 said as art and innovation are anathema to Islam. The religion seems inherently anti-intellectual to me. Most of the historic advancements in the Middle East were made in spite of Islam not because of it. One of Avicennas last writings, Mantiq al-Mashriqiyyin, pretty much confirms this in his own words.

>>21197295
Much like Christianity. Why is one welcomed and the other rejected outright?

>>21196504
>He believes in evolution
Yeah, all good Christians believe the world was created by magic 6,000 years ago.

>>21196504
>He believes in evolution
It is shit like that reminds me I live in the US. Nowhere else in the world is this contested or a point of contention or debate. What is worse is that you see this situation as a badge of honor. That you are the true believer and will no doubt think you will be rewarded as a result of your true faith. There is no sophistication or higher thinking in your theology, you are on the same level as the African or Indian who thinks that by simply praying extra hard God will intervene and remove the obstacle you have before you.

>>21196748
No Muslim army could ever stand in face of a single Western European nation today.
France fucked Africa sideways for the last 40 years and not a single Muslim could ever do anything about it. Muslim armies are shit tier through and through, barely above India Navy level.
And you want these guys to bring you strenght? Holy fuck you are fucking retarded white trash, dont reproduce please.

>>21196583
what makes the trinity bullshit isn't the metaphysics of it, but very simply the fact that it's a latter invention which isn't hinted at in any book of the bible. The son is clearly subordinate to the father.

>>21196479
>Jordan Peterson will never become Muslim
good. that retarded bastard doesn't deserve to be saved

Good. He's not beyond all hope of being saved.

>>21196710
Honestly dude, the vast majority of christians dont understand the trinity and dont give a fuck about it also. Almost all of they think Jesus is a fractured god/person different and subjected to god and thats it, nobody understands what is the holy ghost exactly also.

>>21196776
Lol that last part is completely wrong. Islam is stronger than ever and christianity dying. The most "enlightened" countries completely abandoned religion and Christ himself is being worshipped now only by africans, old people and incel larpers. Pathetic

>>21197655
It doesn't really matter. That guy demonstrated in this thread that his views are more contradictory than the trinity is. He literally started typing random characters as some sort of way to say, checkmate, critics".
>

Honestly dude, the vast majority of christians dont understand the trinity and dont give a fuck about it also.
>Honestly dude, the vast majority of christians dont understand the trinity and dont give a fuck about it also.
And this is just the aroganc eI was talking about. This whole "I memorized some trivia about your rleigion, so I know it more than you" attitufe I've seen from most Muslims I've met is just embarrassing. I've destroyed every single Muslim I've argued with on this board. You guys are not the intellectual powerhouses you think you are, and you should stop pretending to be something your not.

>>21196479
The Quran and it's dick lusting eyed followers are retarded
Refute me.

>>21197752
You have enough proof in this thread.

>>21197754
Uh oh somebody seems a little cranky today.
Forgot to take your daily dose of cum today sweetie?

>>21196649
Imma party with Jesus forever in an eternal cloudrave

juden peterstein

>>21196490
>Jordan went into that discussion trying to bring Abrahamic religions together. That fucking idiot Mohammed went into it trying to get Jordan to say "Christianity is wrong, Islam is correct."

And this is why monotheism is an utter waste of time. Because monotheism isn't interested in wisdom, it just wants to confirm it's right all the time. Only problem is that other monotheists want to hear the exact same thing, and will argue and fight each other when they don't get to hear this

>>21196479
>The only thing he likes about religions is the "psychological" aspect or the "self-help" aspect.

All Anglos are like this. Cursed people.

>>21196479
I'd like to see Peterson debate Seyyed Hossein Nasr and be made entirely to submit.

>>21196787
>Omnipotence must entail the capacity to transcend logic
Your entire argument is really basic and implicitly refuted in Euthyphro. In other words you are separating an entity ens rationis from itself and saying it is limited by being itself. Your argument can also be picked apart by comparing the scholastic transcendentals to their privatives. There's a good reason Plotinus made the One (with many reservations about it being "numerical" in the ordinary sense, which it is not) the transcendent and omnipotent principle, which I'm sure you don't know anything about. And Plotinus of course is what much of the more esoteric Islamic theology is derived from.

>>21196490
>You all worship the same God
Christians don't worship pigfucker gods

>>21196822
>the rest of the world is and always has been deeply motivated by what we call racial bias
Lmao stop projecting chud

>>21196822
Cringe.

>>21198098
>Your entire argument is really basic and implicitly refuted in Euthyphro. In other words you are separating an entity ens rationis from itself and saying it is limited by being itself.
Please elaborate, I'm interested.
>Your argument can also be picked apart by comparing the scholastic transcendentals to their privatives.
How?
>There's a good reason Plotinus made the One (with many reservations about it being "numerical" in the ordinary sense, which it is not) the transcendent and omnipotent principle, which I'm sure you don't know anything
What is this reason?
If it were as simple as you make it seem, you would have refuted my argument in a direct way, rather than trying to send me a wild goose chase of research. If you're as knowledgeable as you claim, you could have provided the minuscule amount of elaboration needed to do so.

>a junkie quack youtuber into alt-medicine tries to tell others how to live
No thank you.

>>21196568
The hell is this

>>21198869
Christians are the biggest hypocrites ever. They keep pointing to the atrocities caused by Muslims to feel better about themselves, but any impartial study of Christian history will show they are no better, if not marginally worse. For example, Christian missionaries on a mountain in Travancore (India) burned a sacred ancient tree, which the Hindus would worship, and used it in the construction of their own Christcuck temple. The Christians historically had some bizarre obsession with cutting down or burning trees in name of their beloved Jew (e.g., Donar's Oak and Zoroastrian holy cypresses). I may need to research more of course, and keep in mind, I'm simply doing my best to remain impartial based on trends I've read.
Moreover, the very nature of "industry" may have Protestant origins, and an industry is oriented towards being at war with nature. Industrialization was born from Christianity, and industrialization was the biggest mistake in all history. The very notion of "progress" seems to be behind the destruction of the world.
Also, no matter how much a Christian argues against it, it is very creepy to eat bread and drink wine calling it the flesh and blood of Christ. Are people that brainwashed not to infer this is reenacting cannibalism? I've even read of Catholic "miracles" where the bread temporarily turned in pulsating flesh. The whole tradition is full of blood (atonement) magic and gives off a sense of misery, guilt, and so on. There is no real joy. This is why Christtards come off as being sanctimonious, feeling they have to "guide" the world, but all this has led towards is the failure of industrialization, globalization, and environmental catastrophe on a scale we have never seen before.
All of Abrahamism is trash, but I find Christians to be the most two-faced, passive aggressive, and annoying right now. Muslims, at the very least, are direct with their savagery. There's no veneer of deception from them. You know from the start you're dealing with brutes, and a brute is marginally more preferable than a two-faced sanctimonious schizo who has a strange disdain/disenchantment with nature, latent preferences for cannibalism, and a martyrdom complex.

Also, if anyone wants to help me in my research, can you tell me if Muslims have ever burned or chopped down ancient sacred trees for "idolatry"? I consider such behavior a great offense, moreso than massacring human beings.

>>21198880
>Also, if anyone wants to help me in my research, can you tell me if Muslims have ever burned or chopped down ancient sacred trees for "idolatry"? I consider such behavior a great offense, moreso than massacring human beings.

It seems this is a feature of Abrahamism in general: "With the crystallization of Islam, these old venerated trees were cut down and this kind of worship was strictly forbidden" [[91]:318; [92]:243–244].
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1500805/

They're all the same anti-life shit!

That's it, every single Muslim, Christian, and Jew, women and child alike, should die. Every last one of you deserves a painful and excruciating death, period. All of you deserve your heads lobbed off.

>>21198912
Nooooo not muh trees!!!!1!
meanwhile
>is literally using a wooden desk, wooden timber framing, wooden chairs

>>21198912
Not to mention
>books made out of hundreds of pages of sacred tree

>>21198935
>>21198929
All of this is because an Abr*hamic religion won in the global scheme of things. Now we're dealing with shit like massive impurities in the Earth & ocean, massive biodiversity die out, the overlogging of ancient forests, and much more. It's over the top now, and it is directly traceable to Abrahamism.

>>21196692
>No Christian says that the Holy Trinity is three distinct persons.
99% of western Christian do say that, from the Latin where the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are called personae. Eastern Christians use hypostasis, from the Greek, meaning a type of underlying reality.

From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

>The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion — the truth that in the unity of the Godhead there are Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from another.

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm

>>21197548
Pic related is fake news. Why did you not even look it up?

>>21197548
>Pakistan could not BTFO of Belgium in an intergalactic tournament that isolates the armed forces and geographies of both countries from geographic boundaries and alliances

>>21199436
His meme example of a Muslim nation was also an 80% Hindu nation.

>>21196490
>Jordan went into that discussion trying to bring Abrahamic religions together. That fucking idiot Mohammed went into it trying to get Jordan to say "Christianity is wrong, Islam is correct."
true

>>21196603
correct but perennialism is based on "mystical" attainment not vulgar intellectualism

>>21196672
>it is unique in that it claims Mohammad to be the last and final prophet
thats not unique at all. consider Joseph Smith and others like him.

>>21197655
the Holy Spirit is the presence of God in us

>>21196583
because the three aren't related by a +

>>21196672
>as the Torah is no longer relevant to Christians
Lol what.

>>21196479
Hopefully that video wakes Christian's up. Peterson isnt an ally to Christianity and only fellated the mudslime after any of his attacks on Christianity. Pageau knew what was up, it's unfortunate that Peterson suckered him into such a situation.

>>21197596
>The son is clearly subordinate to the father
Monarchy of the Father is literally in the Trinity doctrine.

>>21199958
To be fair both Pageau and Hijab were using Peterson. Peterson is a shill anyway.

>JP debates le Muslim philosopher
>It is literally a salafi retard
Get fucked

Islam is arguably an incel revolt masquerading as a religion, complete with incestuous lolis and sex slaves

>>21201035
All three Abrahamic traditions have a problem with endemic infant rape. The typical counter is that there are more likely to be raped by a teacher than a religious leader, but there are far less children in the care of Religious leaders than in the care of teachers so per capita the danger is far far worse from Jews, Christians and Muslis (Or just arabs in general).

>>21196479
>he will redefine true to mean anything other than "objectively true and correct"
the mode of all religion

>>21196479
Of course the Qur'an is a lie. It is literally just Arabia at large coming up with a counter to Judaism and Christianity. You can't refute the Bible, crazy, especially not by larping Jesus wasn't who He said He was, but was actually just a nice prophet guy who will come back some day to tell you all that our new book was actually the real one. Pffftttt. Get real. Qur'ran is just a Satanic larp. There's only one way to the Father and only one name by which man can be saved - it is not Mohammed, it is not Allah, it is the name of a Jewish man, Jesus Christ.
>>21196490
>t. unwashed, unread atheist

>>21201022
Yeah Muhammad Hijab is some faggot with a social media presence, he's not a theologian.

>>21201361
>t. follower of a dying religion

Religion is on its way out, ordinary people don't think like that anymore in civilised countries. If you cite third world countries that have only recently undergone industrial revolution, then I'm going to laugh at you.

>>21201413
>Religion is on its way out
This. Philosophy, blood and soil is replacing it thankfully.

>>21201496
I'll say in religion's defence that it served a great purpose and western civilisation exists in no small part thanks to it's contributions, and even now it has some great life lessons, but to actually believe it all really happened with all the evidence to the contrary is ludicrous. There are giants and unicorns in the Bible. It might be the greatest fantasy epic of all time. But it's still fiction all the same. I don't believe the Bible is real any more than I believe Lord of the Rings is real.

I don't think spirituality is bad, I just think organised religion and wilful ignorance is bad.

People have evolved past it. There is a hole left in it's wake and I'm not sure how society can fill it, but we will. I don't think it makes sense to fit the same shape in though when the hole has changed shape.

>>21201621
>There are giants
From memory Goliath was 9'2, which can exist
>and unicorns in the Bible
I don't know about actual unicorns in the bible, I know there's two animals which are somewhat controversial, namely; Leviathan and Behemoth.
There's also a dragon with 7 heads

>>21201413
The Muslim always operates on a quantity-based mindset, evidently ignorant of the fact that the implosion of Christianity and the spread of heresies, globalism, scientism and idolatry throughout once-Christian countries ajd lands is actually a sign that the Antichrist is coming and that the Bible, as always, is correct. The great apostasy, global government, antichrists afoot, Zionism, the decline of the Church, it’s all foretold. The Whore of Babylon, i.e. the Roman Catholic Church, will be a key part of this.

>>21202031
Pretty amazing that the bible talks about "scientism" when the scientific method didn't exist until nearly 2000 years after the new testament.

>>21202031
Have you ever considered the possibility that this mess is being engineered by a sick, twisted cabal of elites, who follow the occult, and that it's not happening organically?

>>21202260
Yes. They are attempting to immanentize the eschaton or in other words to accelerate the end of the ages.

>>21198880
Based post

>>21196479
Peterson doesnt even believe that Jesus historically existed. He isnt fit to talk about religion at all, especially not Christianity.

>>21197311
>This is akin to the whole muh Vatican pedos argument
that's 100% correct, althought that really only applies to catholicism

>>21196583
the holy trinity constitutes one whole.

>>21202969
>So and so does not think faith is an adequate stand in for reason. Therefore they should not be allowed to speak, and pollute all my too-sacred-for-scrutiny ideas with his pesky adult world skepticism.

The religious should all kill themselves.

>MY schizo is better than YOUR schizo
every religious conflict in summary

>>21196479
The only thing Jordan Peterson is good for is a Zapruder mist.

>>21196495
Islam cherry-picks which parts of the NT are true, which is contradictory and self-refuting of Islam. Jesus can't be the greatest prophet before Mohammad and the NT be the true word of god EXCEPT the resurrection, because if that part of the document is doctored then it must call into question the authenticity of the rest of it. They have no evidence this is the case, it is transparently a bald and self-serving assertion.

>>21203208
Not a Muslim, i hold all 3 flavors of Abrahim to be utterly alien to Europe.

>Islam cherry-picks which parts of the NT are true, which is contradictory and self-refuting of Islam.
This is wrong, Islam claims to be a restoration of the original faith. There are things in the NT which are correct which would be kept and included in the restoration of the creed.

>>21196672
Muhammed was very obviously an opportunistic warlord who used his """""religion""""" to rally the arabs for conquering

He is quite literally (an) Antichrist

>>21196670
God does not send people to hell or heaven. Who the fuck even came up with that? YOU choose whether or not you got heaven through the casting away of your pride, the acceptance that you are inherently sinful, repentance for your sins and asking forgiveness from Jesus who died to save you from them and choosing God over yourself in the end. If you are prideful and believe that you can save yourself from sin without God, than you choose to go to hell.

>>21203362
It's not so easy to just rally people together for your own self-benefit. I think Mohammed had a real critical perspective on Christianity that resonated with the arabs he rallied to his conquests. It still resonates today, islamic theologians have disagreements with Christ. One of the manifestations of that disagreement was the conquest itself, the manner in which Islam has a very real compulsion to serve God on Earth whereas Christianity has a stronger spiritual redemption theology that is suspicious of the spiritual value of secular activity. In Christianity there has been a greater tradition of self-abnegation to express devotion to spiritual salvation, to the faith that one has already been saved by Christ. Whereas in Islam there is a constant struggle to remember and live by the word of Allah, that the grace of Allah is only given by him. Muslims don't believe there was an original sin inherited in the fall, Allah judges individuals and sin isn't passed down as an inheritance of mankind. His manner of judgement is mysterious in the sense that it isn't laid down what criteria will guarantee that Allah will give his grace to you, how could it be known since the actions of Allah are not dictated to him? All you can do is serve him faithfully and hope to receive his grace in death, attempt to live without sin. It isn't that sin can't be forgiven, but the criteria for its forgiveness isn't laid down and can't exactly be known. But Allah is called "merciful" and only cares that the believer faithfully serves him, so even if the true believer sins their faith would be known to Allah because of the believer's knowledge of this error and their continued attempts to not commit sin.

So Islam is crafted in contrast to Christianity to strongly encourage a personal relationship to sin, where the individual has always been without sin and is themselves responsible for their sin against Allah.

>>21203251
>Islam claims
Irrelevant, anyone can claim anything. You didn't address the thrust of the argument.

>>21203583
Anon...

>>21201361
>You can't refute the Bible
HAHAHAHA

>>21201413
>Religion is on its way out
Yeah, Christianity is.

>>21203582
>I think Mohammed had a real critical perspective on Christianity
Muhammad thought the virgin Mary was part of the trinity. He did not understand Christianity at all and his criticism of it is less than worthless.

>>21203362
>to rally the arabs for conquering
And this is bad because?

>>21196490
As a person that was brought up in a Muslim household, I fucking hate people like Mohammed Hijab that make it their life's mission to convert as many people as possible to Islam. Now that I think about it, most true Muslims have this aim to varying degrees. Those like Mohammed Hijab that debate people on the street, and others that dip into conversations of religion with co-workers with the intention of proselytising.

>>21203921
>most true Muslims have this aim to varying degrees
And what's wrong with that?

>>21203462
This mentality so fucking cu cked. You're telling people to go through life stooped with their head down. Pride is good, striving for power is good. What matters is that you reach your highest potential in life. A God that preaches such a life of striving would be much more beneficial for society.

>>21203928
It's insufferable more than anything else. It dominates their lives. And rest assured, they're not doing it for your benefit, they're securing their place in heaven by converting you. Funny that, according to the Quran there are several routes you can take to absolutely 100% go to heaven.

>>21203959
Calling people to Islam is one of the best deeds.
>And rest assured, they're not doing it for your benefit, they're securing their place in heaven by converting you.
I know of people that do it genuinely and people that don't.

>>21203959
It should be illegal to proselytize or advertise any religion. If someone wants to know about your religion they have to seek you out.

>>21198880
They’re anti-nature and chop down holy trees and such simply as a consequence of their monotheism. Abrahamics are deathly afraid of spiritual forces that appear to come from outside of God, so if a tree has spiritual power, and since a tree is not God it must be “in rebellion” against God and in league with Satan. That’s why the old pagan Gods were recast as demons or fallen angels. I’m of the opinion that this mindset and not the scientific revolution was the real cause of the disenchantment of the world. Christians and Jews (don’t know about Muslims) have been in the business of debunking, casting down and persecuting anything in the immanent world that appears to have spiritual significance because it threatens the omnipotence of their God. The worst for this were by far the Calvinists/Puritans though who went so far as to call Christian holy water a survival of Roman paganism and to call the sacrament an example of black magic or necromancy; promotes complete spiritual sterility and Petersonian “religion as ethics/psychology” shit like OP was saying

>>21204028
NTA but I agree with that, I think the intense focus on the one god led to secularization, even if it wasn't entirely a linear process or a determined one. The process of declaring the power of nothing but god in the world made the way for secularization, and eventually even atheism. Once you've killed all the other deities, there is only 1 left to get rid of.

>>21204028
The scientific revolution was born from such an Abhramic mindset because it treats man as apart from nature and who mechanizes & treats it as serving his ends. Check the quote from Ludwig Klages below.
>Christians and Jews (don’t know about Muslims) have been in the business of debunking, casting down and persecuting anything in the immanent world that appears to have spiritual significance because it threatens the omnipotence of their God.
It is also applicable to the Muslims. They are no different in this respect as I quote here: >>21198912
What's interesting is the earliest Muslims persecuted the Arab pagans who would worship trees, seeing them as dwelling places of jinn.

"Christianity may mouth such phrases as "the welfare of mankind," or "humanity," but what the voice inside these formulas is really saying is that no other living being has the slightest intrinsic value or purpose, except in so far as it can be forced to serve the purposes of man. From time immemorial, the "love" of the Christian has never prevented him from persecuting religious pagans with a murderous hatred; and this same "love" doesn’t prevent him even now from abolishing the sacred rituals of conquered tribal cultures. It is a well-known fact that Buddhism proscribes the killing of animals, because the Buddhist recognizes the obvious fact that each and every earthly creature shares a common nature with man himself. But when one objects to the Italian’s murdering of an animal, he will immediately respond by assuring you that the creature "has no soul," and "is not a Christian." This indicates clearly that, for the devout Christian, only man has a right to live. To the people of the ancient world, religion, which at one time also proceeded according to this pattern that even now springs up in hovels of the people, restrains its standard bearer, and yet it excites him on the other hand, and permits the power of one who threaten the peace of the world to prosper until it has become the terrifying megalomania that considers the bloodiest offenses against life to be permitted, and even commanded, provided such deeds result in "benefits" to humanity. Capitalism, along with its pathfinder, science, is in point of fact the fulfillment of Christianity; the church, like science, constitutes a consortium of special interests; and the "one" that is addressed by a secularized morality is indistinguishable from the life-hostile "ego," which, in the name of the unique godhead of the spirit—only now coupled with a blind cosmology--accounts for the war that has been waged against the innumerable, "many" gods of the world; earlier ages were at least more honest in their opposition to the cosmic deities, for they frankly approached the fray in the menacing aspect of judge."
-- Ludwig Klages

Will provide another interesting quote from his essay "Man and Earth" in the next post.

>>21204028
>>21204220
>>21204235
"No teaching can return us to that which has once been lost. Regarding all such attempts, we feel that man simply does not have the ability to bring about a transformation of his inner life on his own. We stated earlier that the ancients never presumed to unravel nature's secrets by means of experiments, and never thought to conquer her through the use of machines, which they dismissed as clever contraptions that were suitable only for slaves; we now insist, moreover, that they abhorred such attempts as ungodliness. Forest and spring, boulder and grotto were for them filled with sacred life; from the summits of their lofty mountains blew the storm-winds of the gods (it was not from lack of a "feeling for nature" that one did not climb their peaks!), and tempest and hailstones threatened or clashed furiously in the play of battle. When the Greeks desired to construct a bridge across a stream, they begged the river deity to pardon this deed of man for which they atoned by offering up to him a sacrificial libation of wine. In ancient German lands, an offense against a living tree was expiated by the shedding of the offender's blood. Today's mankind sees only childish superstition in those who attend to the planetary currents. He forgets that the interpreting of apparitions was a way of scattering blooms around the tree of an inner life, which shelters a deeper knowledge than all of science: the knowledge of the world-weaving power of all-embracing love. Only when this love has been renewed in mankind will the wounds inflicted by the matricidal spirit be healed."
-- Ludwig Klages

I recommend reading this essay in full and buying The Biocentric Worldview:
http://www.revilo-oliver.com/Writers/Klages/Man_and_Earth.html

I consider Klages the prophet-poet-philosopher of the 20th century.

>>21199612
>>Pakistan could not BTFO of Belgium in an intergalactic tournament
Ok Akhmed.
But no, even Belgians *spits* could destroy Pakistan if they really wanted. Belgians fucked Africa sideways before the French went at it.
> inb4 Brits got btfo by Afghans
Because of an over reliance on Indian troops.

>>21203827
Real compelling stuff from you, you fecal-hued consanguinate.

>>21198614
>Please elaborate, I'm interested.

He couldn't elaborate because he's a midwit who misunderstood one of the entry level Plato texts

>>21204220
>Once you've killed all the other deities, there is only 1 left to get rid of.
That's exactly my point. Here's a quote that isn't explicitly related to this topic (it's from a critic of Auguste Comte complaining about how sociologism/socio-economic factors thinking destroyed Christianity) but it's elucidating
>The revolutionaries were fierce destroyers; Comte does not even care to establish that God does not exist. One does not prove the existence or non-existence of a being. One acknowledges its presence or absence: just like Minerva and Apollo, God departed without leaving behind any questions
Heard any Christian refutations of the Olympians lately? Probably not, because their existence is "obviously" absurd or childish to even think of. I think in this that Christians basically did the preparatory work for the deists and then the atheists. Tied their own noose.
>>21204235
>>21204240
I guess a lot of these ideas are swirling around in 4channeler's heads. I have a copy of the Biocentric Worldview sitting on my shelf right now, just haven't gotten to it yet haha. Stuff like
>But when one objects to the Italian’s murdering of an animal, he will immediately respond by assuring you that the creature "has no soul," and "is not a Christian.
has become highly disturbing to me, although I wouldn't say I started out with this objection to the sons of Abraham. The gripe I developed with them was in their development of the idea of linear history in their theology and my resentment toward the notion of the end of history. Beyond that, exposure to Weber in college got me to want to trace the origins of the disenchantment process and I do believe it has in origin in what Klages is a talking about in >>21204240. I'll have to get on reading that.
Also I'd recommend taking a look at the beginning of Inventing the Individual and some of the chapters on Nazism in Mithcell Heisman's suicide note, although that guy is highly radical and probably schizophrenic. He does go over the conflict between man as nature and man above nature and how that debate bears on a religious war between Abrahamism and paganism that may or may not be happening

>>21202031
Meds

>>21197985
I would say it is not necessary problem with monotheism. It is a problem with abrahamics. Pagan religions were quite diverse and there was a great intrest finding out the true nature of God(s) and our world.
I don't understand how to shift happend but abramaics became disinterested in finding out the true nature of Gods and rather they shifted to justify their own system as forcefully as possible. As much as they like to throw around the word "atheist", they are hardly believers.

>>21196583
Gee.
Muhammad inbreeding commands did a number on mudslimes IQ

>>21196479
cringe
>>21203362
Based

>>21196479

>>21203582
This is pretty much the reason why Islam is the most robust tradition in the world even though most Muslims are totally incompetent. Islam is an all-encompassing faith that requires its adherents to be active agents throughout their lives. Every aspect of Islam must be lived. You can’t just retreat into ascetic spirituality, you can’t avoid responsibility by saying “God loves everyone” or “Only God can judge” just like Christians nowadays do.

>>21204735
I agree with that. I think Christianity was a religion for Rome, and while Christians were well known in the arabian peninsula Muhammed knew that their religion wasn't very suited to the arab people. And I'm kind of being sloppy here because the "arab people" as a nation didn't really exist, but I just mean that Muhammed knew that Christianity was an inadequate religion for the people living in the arabian peninsula. The nomadic people there were not a nation, but also were not like distinct and incompatible nations. They were capable of uniting, I guess you could say.

So while Christianity was the religion of Rome, because it was a religion that helped to reconcile the people of Rome to have an identification with the empire, Islam was a religion that fostered the active unity of the arabs. By the time Christianity was adopted by the Roman state, the empire was built. Its dilemma was maintenance, and I think in many ways that was the material advantage that a religion like Christianity had for the Romans. It recontextualized what Rome was for the myriad subject people, and even after its "fall" the enduring institution was the church. I don't think Christianity was the only important thing in that dynamic, but I think it helped in creating a strange affinity and loyalty to Rome, despite the fact that even late into the empire there was a privilege in being actually within Italy, indicating that Rome was in a sense "for the Romans". But Islam was a different kind of imperial religion, being established in the empire yet-to-be.

>>21203959
I'd be quite dissapointed in the infinite benevolence of God if the muslims are right and this annoying bullshit is a path to heaven. But I guess we will see at the rapture who was right and who was wrong.

>>21204007
That same argument can be applied to liberalism and secularism. But you don't have a problem with that being pushed down people's throats, now do you?

>>21196479
Don't try to convince muslims. You are literally loosing your time. You can try all you want, saying that they are worhsipping the demiurge, and a literal black cube (saturn). They will not change their mind.

>>21202996
Historical Jesus is accepted by mainstream academia. It is undeniable that he actually existed.
How does one claim to be a Christian yet doesnt even believe Christ existed? Peterson is bonkers.

>>21196479
Sand-niggerism will never appeal to whites in a meaningful way. Go back to the middle east you goat fuckers. Your religion is ugly and false.

>>21206353
>will never appeal to whites in a meaningful way
Jesus wasn't white.

>>21206356
Don't quote me unless you're gonna include the part where I call you a fucking sand nigger, you sand nigger. I never said Jesus was white, he transcended race with a universal message of salvation; unfortunately braindead sub-80 IQ niggers like you can't process that. Enjoy hell, nigger.

>>21196479
It's becoming abundantly apparent that religion is for incels if this is the level of discourse

>>21206360
>he transcended race with a universal message of salvation
And yet, he had a race. A race that wasn't white.

>>21203921
There's an almost funny caricature quality to really forward types who do unrelenting preaching and evangelism with their religion where they keep spouting verbal arguments at someone, even if the other person is actually willing to listen for a while. While the example they set with how they live their own lives might be lacking. They start to look like cartoon characters