/lit/ - Literature

It also makes sense through a Calvinist lens, but most people are too afraid of that reality to accept it.

>>21242055
Book recommendations to understand the Calvinist point of view ?

>>21242019
I can't wrap my head around why the bible hates gays. I get that lust & sex before marriage go hand and hand but if a gay waits for marriage like any other straight couple, what's the big deal? Who get hurts? Where's the sin?

>>21242019
Because gnosticism is the very first thing the devil invented after the bible was written to trick people, and the devil is extremely smart.

>>21242019
The 10 commandments are implicitly thought to be for God and man and not for man only and not God.

>>21242019
Because you have schizophrenia, anon.

>>21242514
But who invented the devil?

>>21242597
God invented him though he chose to be evil out of butthurt pride

>>21242606
Why did he create him if he knew beforehand that he'd turn out the way he is then?

>>21242623
Mysterious ways anon. But seriously I assume it has to do with humans having to deal with temptation and hardship and prove their allegiance to god or something

>>21242626
>Mysterious ways
classic cope

>>21242626
I don't like mysterious things.

>>21242432
The accuraed share

>>21242432
Truth for All Time (A Brief Outline of the Christian Faith) is a nice and concise starting point.
Calvin's Commentaries are full of depth and worth reading, they're all available on CCEL or as SWORD modules. Some bits of his commentary on Daniel in particular were quite impactful to me.
Institutes of the Christian Religion is the big book of Calvinist theology, but definitely not a great starting point, more can be gotten out of it down the line after reading Truth and some commentaries.
Lastly, Leibniz's Discourse on Metaphysics isn't a wholly "Calvinist" work per se, but certainly has a lot of common notions/ideas with regard to pre-destination and God. It's pretty short as well, making it a decent companion entry text alongside Truth for All Time.

>>21242019
It also makes sense through a Calvinist lens, but most people are too afraid of that reality to accept it.

>>21242500
the sin is in the repugnant nature of homosexual sex. It's devoid of fecundity. On top of it, it's abhorrently unnatural.
It's kinda like this with all types of sex outside of marriage nowadays (or even sex among married couples too if contraception is practiced).
You faggots are alright if you don't fuck each other in the arse or do any sort of disgusting things with each other.

>>21243342
Based and Weberpilled

It also makes sense through a Calvinist lens, but most people are too afraid of that reality to accept it.

>>21243668
Are you a bot?

>>21242055

>>21243696
>It also makes sense through a Calvinist lens, but most people are too afraid of that reality to accept it.
It also makes sense through a Calvinist lens, but most people are too afraid of that reality to accept it.

>>21243696
As the original poster of that text: no. Someone clearly is buttblasted by it though and wants to make me out to be one.
>>21243668
>>21243686
>>21243707
Problem, papist?

>>21243718
That guy just copy pastes posts in threads all over the board. Hes been doing it for months

>>21243732
It's almost like there's a general trend of repeating silly and self-serious posts, are you guys new here?
One can't explain a joke without being silly so feel free to repeat.

>>21243764
He does it to completely random posts, there is no discernible pattern, and he only started doing it sometime in the past year

>>21243764
He does it to completely random posts, there is no discernible pattern, and he only started doing it sometime in the past year

>>21243764
You weren't doing it in a funny enough way for that to count.

>>21243764
>He does it to completely random posts, there is no discernible pattern, and he only started doing it sometime in the past year

>>21242626
>Mysterious ways anon.
Yeah, glad we based Gnostic Chads don't have to engage in this cope.

>>21244071
Oh yeah well then why did the the pleroma/Sophia allow the demiurge to be created

>>21244077
Uncanny ways, anon.
(I'm not really a Gnostic :-P)

>>21242019


As opposed to what, an agnostic/ignorant one?

>>21244082
I'm actually an Empedocles chad and genuinely dont have to invent endless copes for the incoherence of monism

>>21242055
>God constantly chastises people for doing the sins that he predestined them to do
No it doesn't lol

>>21242597
New Testament Christians. Anyone that tells you god, is an idiot.

>>21242019
becausw you're too afriad to make a leap in faith

>>21244089
You have no clue what Gnosticism means, do you? The opposite of Gnosticism is not agnosticism you fucking dingbat. Look it up. I cannot believe someone who takes time out of their day to post as a fucking tripfag on /lit/ of all places has no idea what Gnosticism is. This is astonishing. The opposite of gnosticism is not agnosticism; it's not as theism is to atheism. It's a distinct set of beliefs about God and the cosmos.

>>21244071
Fellas, I've got to say it, I have had it up to here with gnostics pretending their knowledge of good and evil is somehow more profound as if they didn't just shuffle 'mysterious ways' up exactly 1 ontological shell layer

>>21243668
Yeah... you already said that

>>21244575
Evil is based and good is bad because it simply seeks to control me. Nothing mysterious about that.

>>21244618
>Nothing mysterious about that.
That's not what he meant. He's talking about the classic answer to "if God good, why evil?" which is "God works in le mysterious ways"

>>21244618
>good is bad
Your rejection of good is so unnatural that you need to couch it in terms dependent on a transcendent good for your coping mechanism to even make sense out loud, gay boy.

>>21244565


The fact that the term is misnominally used to signify certain erroneous beliefs, and notions, does not invalidate the fact that geniune —Christian— gnosticism is true, and theoretically valid.

>>21244678
Why does evil exist, gnostic?
If the demiurge wills it, why was the demiurge permitted to will it?

>>21244653
Seeking to control is transcendent?

>>21244684
>[...]why was the demiurge permitted to will it?


The root of the Demiourgos is the Dark —why would he not be permitted to will evil?

>>21244702
"Seeking control" implies control as something that must be sought- placing God as low as man by implication.
Literally every word that has dribbled off your lips has been a lie, slander, or a slanderous lie.

>>21244678
>the only alternative to gnosticism is agnosticism (as theism is to atheism) because... because christian gnosticism exists
Wow that's incomprehensibly retarded

>>21244709
Why would the Light, if it is the prevailing or worthwhile force, permit Dark to will evil?
Gnosticism is the fool's lantern.

>>21244684
>[...]why was the demiurge permitted to will it?


The root of the Demiourgos is the Dark —why, or how, would it not be permitted to will evil?

>>21244715
>Lies and slander
Gosh anon I don't think either ein soph is going to mind the things I've said here tonight. I really just don't think you could have a worthwhile world without evil and transgression

>>21244724
>The root of the Demiourgos is the Dark
Now you're just saying words. What does that even mean? The "Root" of the Demiurge is "Dark"? Oh wow that changes everything, thanks man! Thanks for clearing that up for us!!
Apparently I can just say something like
>the Root of God is Righteousness ——— le why, or le how, would He allow the Demiurge to Will Evil?

>>21244750
>I really just don't think you could have a worthwhile world without evil and transgression
On this we agree- if evil were not a viable option that went materially unpunished, good would be without meaning in human beings.
Where we disagree is your fate, and may it mercifully be Destruction.

>>21244723
>Why would the Light, if it is the prevailing or worthwhile force, permit Dark to will evil?

The Dark is essentially, and principally, different, and distinct, from the Light; when it enters the conversation, The Light vanquishes the Dark; when it enters the perversation, it mixes with it.


>Gnosticism is the fool's lantern.

Yes, for undiscerning individuals like yourself.

>>21244780
Why is the perversation permitted to exist if the Light is the prevailing or worthwhile force?

>>21244181
You don't understand predestination, and also clearly skipped Exodus.

>>21244773
>Destruction
oooh you're gonna make me cum ;p

>>21244783


Because volition (free will/election) exists.

The history of the kosmos, and of the entities within it —how all of them came to be, why they are the way that they are— is gleaned, and learned, via gnosis, which is a theological modality.

>>21244791
>y-you just didn't understand it
No I understand it perfectly well, the Bible's entire narrative becomes an absolute farce when read through a Calvinist lens, any reproach against anyone for sinning becomes absurd when God decreed it from all eternity to happen

>>21244802
Free will, and its requisite "evil as a real choice that can be made," does not uniquely validate gnosticism. You are, as I have said so far in this thread, simply retreading "God works in mysterious ways" with another onionskin layer of pretentious esotericism.

>>21244794
You know if you wanted this dialogue to end, you could've just left, anon, but evil guides your hand.

>>21244802
>The history of the kosmos, and of the entities within it —how all of them came to be, why they are the way that they are— is gleaned, and learned, via gnosis, which [is ordered in the] theological modality [of gnosticism].


>>21244815
Free will, and its requisite "evil as a real choice that can be made," does not uniquely validate gnosticism.

I have not said that it does, but, regardless of that, do you have a "point"?

>>21244825
Staaaahp, I'm blushing so hard as it is >.<

>>21244830
Yes. Gnosticism is, at this point in time and possibly in some previous points in time, nothing but a layer of faux-noble pretense between those who wish to be hidden wise men and those who are content to be Christians. It offers no new solutions to existing existential mysteries, only obfuscating those mysteries behind an added layer of mythopoeic false answers.

>>21244846


You are merely "handwaving".

>>21244846
Gnosticism also teaches Gods creation is evil so it is inherently twisted

>>21244863
I don't know what that's supposed to mean in this context.

To the nescient Judaized or "Protestantized" agnostic, "the highs are worth the lows", and "positives can be made from negatives".


>>21244869


You are abysmally ignorant.

>>21244877
Not an argument

>>21244878


What is "not an argument"? that post was not intended as such.

>>21244886
Calling me ignorant is not an argument and just indicates you cant refute what I said

>>21244893


Your post is selfrefuting, because you willingly ignore who God, and what gnosticism, is.

>>21244903
There is no aspect of Gnostic thought that is not also present, in a healthier form, in unadulterated Christian thought.

>>21244903
It's not self refuting at all. You claim this world is evil. You have to be deranged to think the world is evil. There is evil in it, yes, but how can you not see God everywhere as well?

>>21244911


Referring to gnosis/gnosticism as "adulterated" is oxymoronic.

Quod vide:


>>21244678


>>21244917
>You claim this world is evil.

Where have I done that?

>>21244940
>it's wrong to refer to my poisoned worldview as poisoned. sources cited: my earlier post

>>21244917
>"Oh, Alyosha, I am not blaspheming! I understand, of course, what an upheaval of the universe it will be, when everything in heaven and earth blends in one hymn of praise and everything that lives and has lived cries aloud: ‘Thou art just, O Lord, for Thy ways are revealed.’ When the mother embraces the fiend who threw her child to the dogs, and all three cry aloud with tears, ‘Thou art just, O Lord!’ then, of course, the crown of knowledge will be reached and all will be made clear. But what pulls me up here is that I can't accept that harmony. And while I am on earth, I make haste to take my own measures. You see, Alyosha, perhaps it really may happen that if I live to that moment, or rise again to see it, I, too, perhaps, may cry aloud with the rest, looking at the mother embracing the child's torturer, ‘Thou art just, O Lord!’ but I don't want to cry aloud then. While there is still time, I hasten to protect myself, and so I renounce the higher harmony altogether. It's not worth the tears of that one tortured child who beat itself on the breast with its little fist and prayed in its stinking outhouse, with its unexpiated tears to ‘dear, kind God’! It's not worth it, because those tears are unatoned for. They must be atoned for, or there can be no harmony. But how? How are you going to atone for them? Is it possible? By their being avenged? But what do I care for avenging them? What do I care for a hell for oppressors? What good can hell do, since those children have already been tortured? And what becomes of harmony, if there is hell? I want to forgive. I want to embrace. I don't want more suffering. And if the sufferings of children go to swell the sum of sufferings which was necessary to pay for truth, then I protest that the truth is not worth such a price. I don't want the mother to embrace the oppressor who threw her son to the dogs! She dare not forgive him! Let her forgive him for herself, if she will, let her forgive the torturer for the immeasurable suffering of her mother's heart. But the sufferings of her tortured child she has no right to forgive; she dare not forgive the torturer, even if the child were to forgive him! And if that is so, if they dare not forgive, what becomes of harmony? Is there in the whole world a being who would have the right to forgive and could forgive? I don't want harmony. From love for humanity I don't want it. I would rather be left with the unavenged suffering. I would rather remain with my unavenged suffering and unsatisfied indignation, even if I were wrong. Besides, too high a price is asked for harmony; it's beyond our means to pay so much to enter on it. And so I hasten to give back my entrance ticket, and if I am an honest man I am bound to give it back as soon as possible. And that I am doing. It's not God that I don't accept, Alyosha, only I most respectfully return Him the ticket.”

>>21244950


"Gnosis" is mutually cognate with "nobility" —how does that imply a poisoned worldview, rather than the contrary, according to you?

I reiterate: you are willfully ignorant, but also moronic.

>>21244960
If your opinion had weight, I might be angry with you. As things are, I know that you want to be noble- and all that you profess a belief in is only believed inasmuch as it can make you 'noble' over the base Christian and the base agnost. You are like a growing child in your ways- all pretense, no understanding.

>>21244965


You are merely presumptuously "handwaving".

You can stop posting now.

>>21244965
>>21244971


Also: you ignore what nobility consists in.

>>21244971
A meaningless word spent defensively by one who would do anything to evade living a life with meaning.

>>21244953
>It was a late Easter, and the days were bright, fine, and full of fragrance. I remember he used to cough all night and sleep badly, but in the morning he dressed and tried to sit up in an arm‐chair. That’s how I remember him sitting, sweet and gentle, smiling, his face bright and joyous, in spite of his illness. A marvelous change passed over him, his spirit seemed transformed. The old nurse would come in and say, “Let me light the lamp before the holy image, my dear.” And once he would not have allowed it and would have blown it out.
>Light it, light it, dear, I was a wretch to have prevented you doing it. You are praying when you light the lamp, and I am praying when I rejoice seeing you. So we are praying to the same God.”

Those words seemed strange to us, and mother would go to her room and weep, but when she went in to him she wiped her eyes and looked cheerful. “Mother, don’t weep, darling,” he would say, “I’ve long to live yet, long to rejoice with you, and life is glad and joyful.”

“Ah, dear boy, how can you talk of joy when you lie feverish at night, coughing as though you would tear yourself to pieces.”

“Don’t cry, mother,” he would answer, “life is paradise, and we are all in paradise, but we won’t see it, if we would, we should have heaven on earth the next day.”
Every one wondered at his words, he spoke so strangely and positively; we were all touched and wept. Friends came to see us. “Dear ones,” he would say to them, “what have I done that you should love me so, how can you love any one like me, and how was it I did not know, I did not appreciate it before?”

When the servants came in to him he would say continually, “Dear, kind people, why are you doing so much for me, do I deserve to be waited on? If it were God’s will for me to live, I would wait on you, for all men should wait on one another.”

Mother shook her head as she listened. “My darling, it’s your illness makes you talk like that.”
Mother, darling,” he would say, “there must be servants and masters, but if so I will be the servant of my servants, the same as they are to me. And another thing, mother, every one of us has sinned against all men, and I more than any.”

Mother positively smiled at that, smiled through her tears. “Why, how could you have sinned against all men, more than all? Robbers and murderers have done that, but what sin have you committed yet, that you hold yourself more guilty than all?”

“Mother, little heart of mine,” he said (he had begun using such strange caressing words at that time), “little heart of mine, my joy, believe me, every one is really responsible to all men for all men and for everything. I don’t know how to explain it to you, but I feel it is so, painfully even. And how is it we went on then living, getting angry and not knowing?”
So he would get up every day, more and more sweet and joyous and full of love.

>>21244982
When the doctor, an old German called Eisenschmidt, came:

“Well, doctor, have I another day in this world?” he would ask, joking.

“You’ll live many days yet,” the doctor would answer, “and months and years too.”

“Months and years!” he would exclaim. “Why reckon the days? One day is enough for a man to know all happiness. My dear ones, why do we quarrel, try to outshine each other and keep grudges against each other? Let’s go straight into the garden, walk and play there, love, appreciate, and kiss each other, and glorify life.”

“Your son cannot last long,” the doctor told my mother, as she accompanied him to the door. “The disease is affecting his brain.”
The windows of his room looked out into the garden, and our garden was a shady one, with old trees in it which were coming into bud. The first birds of spring were flitting in the branches, chirruping and singing at the windows. And looking at them and admiring them, he began suddenly begging their forgiveness too: “Birds of heaven, happy birds, forgive me, for I have sinned against you too.” None of us could understand that at the time, but he shed tears of joy. “Yes,” he said, “there was such a glory of God all about me: birds, trees, meadows, sky; only I lived in shame and dishonored it all and did not notice the beauty and glory.”

“You take too many sins on yourself,” mother used to say, weeping.

Mother, darling, it’s for joy, not for grief I am crying. Though I can’t explain it to you, I like to humble myself before them, for I don’t know how to love them enough. If I have sinned against every one, yet all forgive me, too, and that’s heaven. Am I not in heaven now?”

And there was a great deal more I don’t remember. I remember I went once into his room when there was no one else there. It was a bright evening, the sun was setting, and the whole room was lighted up. He beckoned me, and I went up to him. He put his hands on my shoulders and looked into my face tenderly, lovingly; he said nothing for a minute, only looked at me like that.

“Well,” he said, “run and play now, enjoy life for me too.”

I went out then and ran to play. And many times in my life afterwards I remembered even with tears how he told me to enjoy life for him too. There were many other marvelous and beautiful sayings of his, though we did not understand them at the time. He died the third week after Easter. He was fully conscious though he could not talk; up to his last hour he did not change. He looked happy, his eyes beamed and sought us, he smiled at us, beckoned us. There was a great deal of talk even in the town about his death. I was impressed by all this at the time, but not too much so, though I cried a good deal at his funeral. I was young then, a child, but a lasting impression, a hidden feeling of it all, remained in my heart, ready to rise up and respond when the time came. So indeed it happened.

>>21243676
Based and saved. They are sick people with literally reduced life expectancy.

Tripfags should be permabanned from this board

>>21242019
Probably because you were raised irreligiously by badly catechised Western Protestants/Catholics and thus fell into anti-Christianity, like many other zoomers or millennials. Gnosticism was a small collection of related religions that orthodox Christians continuously refuted until they went extinct after only a few centuries.
The New Testament itself contains refutations against the Gnostics of the first century by the Apostles. Regardless of whether any Gnostic faith is true, interpreting the Bible Gnostically is retarded

>>21245932
Wasn't the first version of the New Testament composed by Marcion, a Gnostic?

>>21246060
Yeah, Marcion compiled the first canon; an edited version of Luke + some of Paul's epistles, iirc. The non-Pauline epistles, especially the Johannine, are where the anti-gnostic refutations are. Though Paul does attack them too in a letter or two, if I'm not mistaken

>>21245932
Gnostic thought is still alive and well in the church despite the murderous attempts to quash it. See all mariology.

>>21246293
Mariology is not Gnostic

>>21246304
Proto-orthobros have nothing to say about Mary until the 400ADs then they adopt the same stories (dormition, assumption) which the gnostics had for a few centuries. curious.

>>21242019
>be like a rabbit, who grunts more harmoniously
tis really it

>>21246368
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That said, we do have the orthodox "Book of John Concerning the Falling Asleep of Mary", which was written prior to even the first Ecumenical Council

>>21246513
Cope. You are a gnostic and that's ok.

bump

I've failed God and myself.

>>21248043
There's always a chance for redemption, anon. Do not despair. We believe in you.

>>21242019
Because you are functionally illiterate

>>21243676
Devoid of fecundity is a good thing unless you're a YHWHist. Otherwise, agreed.

>>21248355
Not an argument. And your dubs don't have power over me.

why do christers get so buttblasted about gnostics what is the big deal

>>21244684
>>21244077
There is no talk about "evil" as an ontological principle in the primary gnostic texts. Yaldabaoth is "evil" only insofar as he jealously commands imprisoned worldlings in his flawed world. He is foolish, unjust, and sometimes downright malignant (in the classic AoJ myth).
As for how he was granted this possibility, because how else can evil "come from" good (it never "comes from"), is that permission was given to him by right of his natural power. he was given this power by the abortion of sophia of epinoia, a distant removed aeon who attempted to bear a child without her consort's consent, the Monad. it was a divine mistake, one made out of either hubris or naivete, but ignorance nonetheless. Anything besides the monad must necessarily be not it, and anything not it, cannot be perfect, so therefore any aeon that does not "glorify" (not serve, as the Monad needn't service nor allegiance since it has no lack whatsoever). This mirrors the Platonic issue of "evil". Ignorance is quite the root problem, and I'm not sure how much deeper you can go than that without becoming paradoxical.

The significance of the names is reliant on your own experience. Epinoia literally means afterthought, which is the useless latent sibling of Pronoia or forethought. Sophia meaning wisdom exists as the way, but if not in glory of the Monad, then she is broken and cursed, giving birth to the power that controls matter irreverently.

>>21248412
Seems to be the other way around, in this thread at least.

>>21248412
Because the "christians" here are nothing more than larpers.

>>21242055
It can make sense through many lenses and still be ultimately wrong. Just because it is a consistent system, does not mean it is true. You can create with theoretical mastery of, physics, a logically consistent, realistic magic system but it would still not be true. JWs system 'makes sense', and so do the Mormons, many other protestants but they are still disagreed upon and disbelieved because there are things outside their frameworks to consider.

>>21250392
>You can create with theoretical mastery of, physics, a logically consistent, realistic magic system but it would still not be true
Speaking of physics, wasn't the first person who came up with the Big Bang theory a Catholic priest?

>>21248412
Because christians are and will always be with the truth. Gnostics can't accept that.
LARPers or not, the so call "gnostics" of this thread are deluded and completely lost.

>>21242500
All things have their natural course and purpose, and when that course is diverted, when something doesn't move towards its end, that is suffering. Everything in life moves towards its full expression and shall eventually have it. But when that path is diverted, when it stumbles, that is discord and strife. Homosexuality diverts the generative aspect of man and turns it inwards to self-pleasure, which is always suffering because man is made to pour himself out, which is love.

This idea of the fulfilment of things, of the suffering of things diverted from full expression, is seen in the story of the Fisher King.

This is my take on the condemnation of homosexuality. It turns a man towards the flesh; moves their focus on their own ego; the kingdom of God is diverted by the ego; the full expression of things must come to pass, and like water will always find its own way even if that means destroying anything in its way.

>>21242019
you can't properly understand the bible if you're not a saved Christian. if you're not saved, you should watch this gospel video, believe it, get saved and read the KJV bible (preserved word of God in the english language)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sf3uF0juIVI

>>21244565
Dont interact with the Spaniard cunt, please, he goes away faster if you ignore it.

>>21251617
Based homokiller

>>21245013
Once step closer to heaven

>>21252623
>masorectic text
you KJOs obsess over how the Alexandrian texts were in the same area as Gnosticism and paganism and shit but act completely blind to the antichristian influence of Talmudic Judaism. You use a manuscript for the OT a millennia after christ, preserved (and corrupted) by the Jews that rejected his good news. Meanwhile, the Septuagint was preserved within the church, it's dated back to centuries before christ by the Jews before they became so corrupt Jesus (their prophesied messiah) had to shut them down. The DSS venerate the LXX more. The most you can claim is using the LXX as a guide to guessing where the Tanakh was corrupted and to reverse engineer an uncorrupted text (impossible) all so you can enjoy your 'le epic Hebrew literary devices. KJV is still the best NT IMO however.

>>21253264
And if there are still ambiguity concerns (which there undeniably are) you'll pretend there's a magic perfect solution because you believe in the Sola Scriptura paradox. Meanwhile, Catholics and Orthodoxists have an entire canon of commentaries dating back millennia to the foundation of the church or holy patriarchs clarifying the many issues and questions that arise so they don't have to look for the secret scroll that properly explains a biblical problem because there's a saint who had it before it was obscure and talked about it in the tradition.

>>21253264
And if they insist on using the Hebrew tradition, they have the Christian Vulgate and Peshitta. Alas, they remain suckling on the Christ-hating Masorete's teat

>>21242019

>>21253264
The Hebrew Old Testament predates all of that, so I don't see a problem. The word of God said, Isaiah 40:8, "The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever."

Were there people trying to corrupt God's word? Most assuredly. But did they succeed in changing it? No, because the originals still persist in spite of any manmade attempt to change them. And if you don't believe God can do such a thing, then you aren't a bible-believer at all, so there are much bigger problems at that point.

There is all the evidence in the world that God preserved the word, both Old Testament and New Testament. By the way, the text you refer to as being a thousand years old, that isn't what the KJV used. It was discovered some time later and differs in some places that I know of – for instance, that text says "bandage" in 1 Kings 20:38,41 while the KJV and its source say "ashes" in both places – becoming the "Masoretic text" as exemplified in the Codex Leningradensis. This was used in translations such as the modern New King James and the many alexandrian translations (NIV, etc). It differs somewhat from the true Hebrew Old Testament. But it seems overall fairly similar, so people have inaccurately blurred the two together when they shouldn't have. What the KJV uses is actually the 1525 Bomberg Old Testament text, among other things. The screenshot is from another possible source they used, which is the Elias Hutter version of the Old Testament text that was first published in 1587, and later again in 1599 and 1603, which is the one that I usually use. These editions of the Old Testament were not edited or maintained by Masoretes, far from it, nor were they dependent on them for information about what the Hebrew Old Testament looked like. To say they were is a rather absurd suggestion considering that people have been reading the Old Testament for far longer than that group existed. Also, modern scholars try to "cope" by calling it the "pre-masoretic" text, even though if the text predates them, why would you still associate it with them?

IOW, the masoretes are not our only source for the Old Testament, and nobody had to rely on them for anything. They seem to have preserved something similar to the Old Testament, but not quite: For instance, the "Ben Asher Masoretic" differs from the originals in 1 Kings 20:38,41 as mentioned before. It is supposed to say "ashes" but instead says "bandage" in both verses. The KJV says ashes, so it is more accurate in this place. By the way, changing the word as is done here seems to undo a miracle.

OTOH, there are so many problems with the modern LXX (as handed down to us from Origen) that I don't even know where to begin. But to start, there is the fact that it has Methuselah dying 14 years after the flood of Noah has already taken place. This is a result due to the fact that it changes the patriarchs' ages around. Also numerous messianic prophecies are removed in the LXX by Origen.

>>21242623
What happens at the End?
If Evil gets redeemed, then is the Problem of Evil solved? If so, then doesn't all suffering have purpose?

I'm tired of gnostic LARPers pretending they found some secret code when they're just being good goyim and repeating Talmudic bluster.
https://heritage-history.com/index.php?c=read&author=pinay&book=plot2&story=gnostics

Why do certain individuals dismiss Christian gnosticism, despite it being in syncord with the precepts set by Jesus Christ, and the dogmas established by the true —Catholic— church? these same individuals always resort to petty insult, and/or presumptuous misdirection, whenever you evince this fact via ethicomoral, scientific, and etymological confirmation; could it be that they are simply credulous, and poor thinkers? I think so.

>>21253264
>Meanwhile, the Septuagint was preserved within the church, it's dated back to centuries before christ by the Jews before they became so corrupt
Anon, they were always corrupt.

>>21254350
>when they're just being good goyim and repeating Talmudic bluster.
Gnosticism predates the Talmud by at least two centuries though.

>>21254350
>>21254661
Also, it doesn't make any sense to link Gnostic teachings with the Talmud, since both are entirely different in their content, structure and purpose - the former is a broad and multifarious doctrinal movement of various theological, cosmological, ontological, etc. teachings that are not always connected and even related to each other due to their volatile and extremely miscellaneous tenets (there were hundreds of different Gnostic sects spanning all over the Mediterranean at that time), while the latter is just a commentary of an already existing religious text and teachings. They have nothing to do with each other.

>>21242500
counter productive to society and extremely unhygienic in ancient times, causes mass death through transmitted diseases.

The bible is a book on "how to keep and maintain a healthy society that will prosper forever"

In a time before anal douches', medical advancements, shower's and other hygiene practices, getting fucked in the ass regularly by dudes was a quick way to die.

Imagine an aids outbreak but 2000 years ago with no modern medicine, yeah all you fuckers would be dead.

The bible isn't guesswork either, these are ancient people that lived, saw what happened, paid attention when thing went horribly wrong and what the cause was and wrote it down.

gay people in ancient times had sex, spread disease, had no offspring and and died early, the logical conclusion to any ancient observer was that god hates it and punishes you for it, it's really that simple.

>>21242019
Nothing in the good book is of any private interpretation. Believe or dont. Free choice. Jesus gave His life to buy you back from the gnostic serpent lion goat angel of witches and death and give you a chance to be free from the sin that we all partake in. And have eternal life in the kingdom of God, which you can be a part of now. If you would believe. God is love & truth. You cant bend Him to make Him make sense in a world that didnt recognize Him 2000 years ago let alone now, in our altered carbon skynet everybody is a witch timeline

FACT: Three out of four /lit/-brand Gnostics were New Atheists in their teenage years.

>>21242019
It makes sense if you're a retard who never read the Bible and whose knowledge of Christianity comes from pop culture and atheist propaganda.
Jesus is literally prophecized all over the Old Testament and all these prophecies and many other events and verses are quoted in the New Testament by Christ and the Apostles.
This idea of le evil OT demiurge and good loving NT good is beyond retarded.

>For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. John 5:46

>>21242500
It’s not just that. It’s considered a sin because it cannot end in conception meaning it is singularly about lust

>>21242500
Sexual relations are blessed between a husband and a wife for procreation. Homosexuality is going against this natural order, it's a deviation, it produces nothing, it's a pursuit of the passions in a very twisted way.
If you fornicate with a woman you can at least end up marrying with her/have kids, but homosexuality can't lead even to that.
God isn't a libertarian who just wants you to keep the NAP and be nice, there's good and bad and an order to things you must obey to.