/lit/ - Literature

BECAUSE THEY AREN'T THE SAME GOD

>>5228300

Christ is not The Father is not The Holy Ghost

But all of them are god.

It's the oldest con in the book, OP -- conjure up a thing which must be warded against, then provide the warding.

>holy ghost
Srs...

>>5228321

holy spirit?

>>5228308
And Allah is Jesus' uncle and Buddha is his brother. ...But they're all god

The hebraic god is a demiurge. The new testament god is a higher being.

Because from heaven, people look like ants.

>>5228321
>>5228326

Holy Spirit, or Holy Ghost, is a term found in English translations of the Bible

The differences are greatly exaggerated.

He's just as just and merciful, angry and meek, in both. If you actually read them you'll find that there's a lot of places in the Old Testament where God gives the Israelites mercy and promises them forgiveness once they have corrected their ways, and if you read the New Testament you'll see that there's a lot of places where Christ is angry and speaks of punishment and hellfire. If it's because God in the Old Testament commands a lot of non-believers and non-Israelites to be slaughtered then check out what Christ says to the Canaanite: he calls her a dog, and he isn't any more lax on unbelievers than he was in the Old Testament.

>>5228334

>butterfly

fundamental misconstruing the trinity is a problem if you've actually read the new testament. which i doubt.

Guys I once read somewhere that when Jesus went under water, he had gills and could breath. Is this true??

>>5228354
No, he didn't go under water. He walked on top of it. No gills needed for that, friend.

The Old Testament prophets and the Gospels have a different tone. The prophets were written to send a warning to the Israelites that something terrible was about to happen to them because they had transgressed. The Gospels were written to give hope to the weary. Yet, if you examine the sentiments of God in the Old Testament and Jesus Christ, you'll find that they are consistent.

>>5228354

that was harrpy poter

>>5228358
Yeah, I read something about that too -- it said his feet grew and were like water skis and that's where the idea for water skis came from. Can you confirm this? Did Jesus invent water-skiing?

>>5228358
>>5228362

I grant you it was not a remarkable reference, but you dunces missed it.

>>5228362
OHH, I knew it was something, yeah.

If anything though, Christ is more 'vengeful'; I don't believe that there is mention of an eternal lake of fire in the Old Testament.
People stress Christ's meekness and forgiving nature a bit too much. He doesn't forgive people's sins because "hey, they're no big deal anyway". No, he tells you that your sins are terrible and that you deserve to go to Hell for them, but forgives you anyway. If the sins were no big deal then his forgiveness wouldn't mean much. He abhors sin just as much as God in the Old Testament.

>>5228343
>>5228360

Thank you

You are the only trip here I like

>>5228377
>>5228378
On that sinning thing -- I hear it is a sin to be covetous of your neightbour's wife, but what about just plain old lustful? Can I masturbate to my neigbour's wife, but not want to steal her? I feel the Jesus wasn't very diligent in detailing what exactly is a sin here.

>>5228346
I have read most of it. Though I haven't committed it to memory, I don't need to to know the trinity can't be reasoned with. People worship the unreasonable in "unimaginable" space to protect it from scientific or just plain logical thinking. Got it.

>>5228392
QUICK!! I'm really horny and need to masturbate soon. I don't want to be a sinner. Good Christians, please help.

>>5228393
>Though I haven't committed it to memory, I don't need to to know the trinity can't be reasoned with. People worship the unreasonable in "unimaginable" space to protect it from scientific or just plain logical thinking. Got it.

You accurately described meditation.

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."

-St. Thomas Aquinas

Well shit, I might be a sinner now, thanks guys.

>>5228414
>pestilential

"pestilential
ˌpɛstJˈlɛnʃ(ə)l/
adjective: pestilential

relating to or tending to cause infectious diseases."

lol

It doesn't matter. Do you worry about anything in the Quaran or deeper Jewish texts? Do you worry about those? Nah. You're just a western person concerned with the religion you think you're supposed to be.
None of them matter in the details, they're all mostly the same and a mature person following any religion will be more pleasant than a fundamentalist of any relgion.

A mature Muslim and a mature Christian will get along better than fundamentalists. The desire to know god isn't a problem. That's just people trying to do what is right. Fundies are the problem.

I loved Hitchens too, but once you think, he was an imperialist jackass. But what else can one expect from an Englishman?

>>5228300
He finally got laid.

Question about the Virgin Mary: Did she poop while giving birth to Jesus/poop in general? Because that'd be really impressive, if she never pooped ever.

>>5228447
kek

>>5228444
Also this pic is the Gothenburg waterfront

>>5228354
You are thinking of Waterworld starring Kevin Costner.
And, yes, Costner's character did have gills and could breathe underwater and he was the Messiah sent to save us from evil Chinese people.

>>5228444
I'm didn't make this thread as a sarcastic blow against Christianity, I was genuinely interested.

>>5228444
What is a fundamentalist? I'm honestly interested in knowing because I hear that term thrown around a lot and I'm not sure what it means.

>>5228459
wtf i don't remember him having gills

Would Non-Pooping Mary also be a correct title for Jesus' mom, or did she poop?

>>5228460
It still doesn't really matter. With all my respect for any religion none of them ate literal truth. If you're a believer this isn't the place to ask and if you're not you need to think a bit more.

>>5228463
Conservative belief. One's belief taking precedence over reality. No two people's religion are the same. Mature people understand this and accept differences in belief, even in the "same" god. Perhaps militant conservatives vs liberals is more accurate?

>>5228300
That's because the God of the Old Testament was the God of a people on the move. The Jews had to kill lots and lots of people, and if God was to be with them he had to be willing to kill lots and lots of people alongside.

The God of the New Testament was the God of a subjugated people. The Roman subject (like the American subject today) could afford to be nonviolent since there was a professional army way out over there killing people to support his laid back way of life. The Christian God (at least, back when Jesus was alive and the Bible was being written) could sit back and chill with his people since the Roman Empire was doing the dirty work.

>>5228421
Boils are a frequent occurrence in the old testament.
Part of how God let you know he was unhappy with you.

lol at those fags on the bottom jonesing for jesus dick lmao

>>5228470
>>>/readot/

>>5228495
Sunset found her squatting?

>>5228479
This answer has left me confused. I'm not sure what you are trying to say m8.

> No two people's religion are the same.

So a religious fundamentalist is one that thinks Muslims share the same religion, that Buddhists share the same religion, etc.?

>Mature people understand this and accept differences in belief, even in the "same" god.

OK, but if you're in a congregation of Catholics and the priest declares that Jesus Christ was a space alien, are the congregants "fundamentalists" for insisting that Jesus Christ was "the incarnation of the God the Son"? Would that be immature of them?

>>5228463
A fundamentalist is someone who insists upon the absolute and unquestionable nature of sacred texts. Islamism, fundamentalist Christianity (ie, Fred Phelps), but also men like Dawkins and Neil deGrasse Tysonne are fundamentalists.
Fundamentalists are eager to proselytize. They tend to be very tech forward (when they can use it to support their absolutist view). Islamism was on facebook and twitter years before Obama would become the intarwebs President. They are incapable of compromise, they lack any sense of self-awareness and tend to look ridiculous or hypocritical from the outside. They seek political power through/for their ideology.

>>5228467
I suggest you review the sacred youtube clips, brother. We serve a risen savior, he's in the world today, he's a mutant, etc.

>>5228504
So, say if you are a Catholic or a Muslim and in your religion the sacred texts have been said to be inerrant for centuries, and you believe, according to the doctrine of your religion, that these texts are indeed inerrant, but you do not proselytize or seek to gain political power - are you a fundamentalist. Is a nun who lives in a cloister or a Muslim wife living a quiet existence that believe that their sacred texts are infallible - are they fundamentalists?

>>5228300
>Why is God a vengeful motherfucker in the old testament but turns into a paragon of peace and love after he sends himself down to earth
Because you're a moron who didn't actually read the Bible.

>>5228501
You and the other dude are right. I haven't perfected my explanations.
What I mean to say is the exact, specific, minute details of any religion don't matter. They're all just writings of slightly more moral men trying to explain/coerce the masses into either a working society or some kind of enlightenment. Either way a mature person will not be caught up in trivial tribal differences and will allow for disagreement as long as no one is imposing their ideas others. Mature and compassionate "Muslims" have more in common with mature and compassionate "Christians" than most American Christians have with each other.

(I don't consider any of this complete, please help me along)

>>5228525
Absolutely not. Nuns and monks are among the most respectable persons on the planet. Their entire goal is to know god, peacefully, in their own way.

>>5228537
>catholics
>respectable

maybe orthodox monks might be a bit less disgusting

I'm sorry.
I'm defining "maturity" as a desire to know god without trying to impose one's own crazy and fallible beliefs on massive groups of others.

>>5228551
I'm talking people who want to under and what they believe to be the greatest possible good. I'm not talking douchebags like WLC.
I mean quiet men who take their scriptures for the good intentions they were written with.

I'm a total unbeliever.

>>5228537
So then, the belief that your sacred text is infallible doesn't really have much to do with being a fundamentalist? It's more about seeking political power?

>>5228531
So what you're saying is, that in order to prevent religious people from imposing their ideas on society, we have to impose on society the idea that it doesn't matter what religion you belong to as long as you are a nice person?
Can you see the hypocrisy?
You are the "fundamentalist" of your own religion, the religion of "secular niceness". If a Muslim horde were to try and impose Islam on a Western nation, they would be called "crazy fundamentalists", but if a Western nation were to impose "enlightenment, tolerance, peace, democracy" on a Muslim nation, that would be called "freedom" or "liberty" or "civilization"? Well what if the Muslims think that the imposition of Western society is "McDonalds and Walmart fundamentalism"?

You're saying that religious people shouldn't be allowed to impose their ideas on society, but the the idea that religious people shouldn't have a say is itself an idea which is imposed on society.

>>5228525
Someone who doesn't seek to proselytize is not a fundamentalist, no.
Fundamentalism, like I said about the being tech forward and refusal to compromise, requires outward expansion. Which is why they are such a problem. A monk or a nun isn't a fundamentalist, they're pretty much irrelevant.

>>5228552
>I'm defining "maturity" as a desire to know god without trying to impose one's own crazy and fallible beliefs on massive groups of others.

Why are sacred beliefs more "crazy and fallible beliefs" than secular beliefs? They are both fallible, aren't they? So what are you against, the imposition of beliefs on others or the imposition of sacred/religious beliefs specifically?
It is a very difficult position to be against the imposition of beliefs. For example, who can argue that it is to good to impose on "massive groups of others" that it is best to drive on the right side of a road in the US and the left side in the UK?

>>5228560
I'm not claiming western society. There are liberal Muslims who agree with me. People who can't see the reality of humanity are the problem.
Some Muslims may take their scripture to mean they must live the way Fundies in the hills do, but others take it to mean something else.

Mos Def is a Muslim. But he acts like any western person aware of western imperialism. He is a Muslim. It means very little. Action is what is important.

All the while the Chinese have NO IDEA about anything we are talking about and are getting along fine. Religion and scripture are less important than accosting the idea that you must not impose your interpretations of scripture on reality.

>>5228571
I think you're too caught up in the connotation of fundamentalism as a pejorative. Though it's not uncommon to hear "fundamentalist ... " as a slur, I still think fundamentalism is just a stark, originalist adherence to a sacred text.

fun·da·men·tal·ism
ˌfəndəˈmentlˌizəm/Submit
noun
a form of a religion, especially Islam or Protestant Christianity, that upholds belief in the strict, literal interpretation of scripture.

>>5228571
So a Fundamentalist is somebody that perseveringly spreads their beliefs online, on television, etc.? If a woman posts reviews and videos all of the internet declaring that 50 shades of Gray is the best book ever written, is she a fundamentalist?

>>5228575
That is exactly what I am getting at. All religions work. Left side is just as good as the right side. What you're used to isn't "right", it's what you're used to.

None of then are correct and a mature person understands that it is easier to live and let live than to force one's own interpretations of fallible beliefs on others.

>>5228560
Neoliberalism ("McDonalds and Walmart fundamentalism") is imminently compatible with everything from Islamism to fundamentalist Christianity to radical atheism to whatever kind of Maoism the Chinese think they're doing. McDonalds and Walmart have a tradition of sliding in among every state, and even with the fascist swing in places like India, multinationals are not concerned.
Generally speaking, this is what "enlightenment, tolerance, peace, democracy" mean when they're actually imposed on countries--their openness to exploitation by international capital. If you think that ISIS spreading their wings will mean an interruption in the supply of oil, then you should look at the Congo. It doesn't matter what warlord happens to be in charge of which mine at what time, the money still goes in and the cobalt comes out and the smart phones get made.

>>5228584
Does the fact that liberalism can sustain an economy make it the preferred social order?

>>5228579
If 50 Shades of Grey is her religious text and she believes the events depicted in the trilogy are literally true and if she is ready to fight for Stephanie Meyer, then yes.
Also, this will be the final proof that New Sincerity has gone too far.

>>5228578
And this adherence demands that the faith spread.
Of course it is a pejorative coming from me. I'm an agnostic slacker who doesn't care about anything. For the person who identifies as such, then the aggressive proselytizing is simply in their nature.
You don't think that Jehova's Witnesses have heard all the jokes about "So a Jerhova's Witness knocked on my door the other day ..."
They still do it. They have to do it. They know that most of the people they meet will refuse them, but they are required to do it because "it" is "right."

>>5228577
Let me give you an example of a real life occurrence.

Back in the late 1700s their was a fraternal organization known as Freemasonry, or Masonry (which exists today). They would allow people of any religion into their ranks; they would have a Catholic, a Protestant, a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Hindu, a Sikh, etc., all gathered around a table as buddies. Now these friendly Masons decided that their fraternity was more important than religious differences, so they began to proselytize their vision of a secular humanity free of squabbles based on religion. They funded a revolution in France which saw the murder of the king and the fall of Catholicism as the state religion. In Notre Dame Cathedral where people had worshipped Christ for hundreds of years, they organized to have dress a woman up as "the Goddess of Reason" so that they could worship her. Their slogan for the revolution was, "liberty, equality, fraternity". Now in the 1800s the Catholic Church got hold of a document called "Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita" which was the plan of a Masonic organization to infiltrate the Catholic clergy and destroy it from within by spreading secularist, Masonic doctrine. Disturbed by this, the Pope issued an encyclical (a letter) to his Bishops condemning what he called "religious indifferentism", i.e. this idea that it doesn't matter what religion you belong to. He argued that as Catholicism is the religion founded by Jesus Christ and the road to salvation, it was in the interest of the Catholic nations to protect themselves from Masonic doctrine which would rob the Catholic flock of their faith and destroy their chances of salvation.

Was this "Catholic fundamentalism"?

>>5228588
The funny thing about liberalism is that it's only there if it succeeds.

>>5228581
>That is exactly what I am getting at. All religions work

But according to the Muslims, only one religion works. According to the Catholics, only one religion works. Etc.

>None of then are correct and a mature person understands that it is easier to live and let live than to force one's own interpretations of fallible beliefs on others.

Your belief that all religions work is fallible. For all you know Islam could be the true religion and only it works.

>>5228596
Fair enough. However, you must recognize that this is only true insofar as the interpretation of their scripture requires proselytizing. Fundamentalism versus liberalism or soft Christianity or whatever name exists for it is too simple of dichotomy. In reality, many different groups all believe that they are fundamental, and in the end, the "god hates fags" group, which most Christians would probably agree is misinterpreting the Bible, is named fundamentalist.

>>5228597

I don't accept the grammar of your question. What the ancient/hundreds of years old Catholic Church did is basically none of my business. It has nothing to do with me.
The Catholic Church can and has easily been corrupted. That is what happens to people who think they have first say with the creator of the universe.

>>5228600
Until it gives way to something much, much worse.

>>5228603
That doesn't matter. I believe anything I want to. Believe =\= reality.
One Christian believes one thing and another believes something else.


Are they not both Christians?
There is no way to determine "rightness" in religion. You can identify as anything you want

>>5228615
>I don't accept the grammar of your question.

Why is it fundamentalist to impose the Catholic belief in sin and salvation on people but not fundamentalist to impose the Masonic belief that it doesn't matter what religion as long as you are nice on people?

>>5228630
Because Catholics aren't all in agreement. One pope nullifies another on a regular basis. It's human.

>>5228630
In other words. Why was the Catholic Inquisition which killed heretics and the cases of Muslims stoning apostates evil and fundamentalist, but the Masonic French Revolution which also saw the slaughter of many people not fundamentalist just because the slogan for the slaughter was "liberty, equality, fraternity" and not "Deus Vult" or "Allahu Akhbar"?
Why is it OK to go to a Muslim nation and kill people for democracy but no OK to go to a Western nation and kill people for Allah?
Why is it fundamentalist to create a society where everyone worships God but not fundamentalist to insist on a society where God has nothing to do with the State?

>>5228479
>Perhaps militant conservatives vs liberals is more accurate?
what do you mean with this? I have engaged in many poliical discussions over the years and I can tell you that many liberals hold "fundamentalist" views when it comes to economic questions meaning that there is only one solution to a given problem (without evidence) and other solutions are (without evidence) automatically false because they go against the narrative. Maybe i just minsinterpreted the word "liberal" since american liberals would be considered social democrats/socialists here in europe.

>>5228626
>>5228630
>>5228645
>>5228652

I think you're all caught up on the word fundamentalism, as I alluded to earlier. Instead you seem to be discussing how many groups, religious and otherwise, proselytize.

>>5228652
That is fundamentalist? I don't agree with killing anyone. My cousin's son was beat by his doucebag father. He was 2. He died. I don't agree with any mother burying any son?

>>5228645
>Because Catholics aren't all in agreement.

They are insofar as they are Catholics, aren't they? They are all in agreement on matters of Catholic doctrine, otherwise they would not be Catholics.

>One pope nullifies another on a regular basis.

actually, it's been the claim of Catholicism for many centuries that no pope has ever contradicted a predecessor.

>>5228669
Of course not. What one says and what one means are regularly inconsistent. The church is no different.

>>5228611
>many different groups all believe that they are fundamental

A couple posts ago, I specifically mentioned Scientism as demonstrated through Dawkins' evopsych reductionism and Tyson's space-obsession. Scientism (not necessarily science, which is just indifferent labor) is a fundamentalism. The requirement is that one sees sacred texts (not just one's own, but every sacred text) as literal and seeks to enforce it.
I also specified being tech forward as an example. Fundamentalists tend to adopt technology before the more mainstream and laid back people do. Despite the inept "Grandma Memes," the internet is not some haven for absolute freedom, but it is, instead, a tool of communication which the religious are eager to seize on.

http://www.gotquestions.org/God-different.html

>>5228680

Catholics are in agreement, that's the entire point of their church.

>>5228300
I don't think you comprehend how total god is. everything that happens is his will.

the old testament god represents a brutal world. jesus is so lame in comparison because he's in the middle of people who aren't even in open war or anything.

Opinions on Marcion of Sinope?

>>5228300

Because that didn't actually happen.

>>5228905

Catholics are in agreement on dogma, but there are places where discussion can take place and opinion can differ.

because the old testament is the real god and the new testament is ressentiment shite

>>5228300
He fell. Like Lucifer

The Antichrist 25-27.

Too much text to post, so look it up if you actually want to know.

Nietzsche talks about the degradation of Yahweh from being a god of justice and the tribe's expression of their will to power, by the work of those priest fags, to the complete denial of nature and reality and surrender of power to the priests. I can't write as good.

>>5228300
The ancient Hebrews believed worshiped their tribal god as the greatest of the gods.
Later, the ancient Israelites and Judeans developed a monotheistic theology where only their tribal god existed.
Later still, the monotheists of Palestine (Jews, Samaritans, etc.) took the old monotheism beyond pagan sensibilities and developed a theology where God is an omnipresent something, unlike old gods which live in Heaven, or mountains, or whatever. This latter development opens up the doorway for universalism, reconciliation of ethnic and cultural differences, the common worth of all human beings, that sort of thing.

>>5228397
If you look at a woman with lust in your eye it is just as bad as committing adultery in the eyes of God. If you can figure out a way to masturbate without lustful thoughts then i guess it wouldn't be a sin.

>>5228551
What's the matter? Did sister Francis slap you in catholic school for being an uppity little shit?

>>5229777
>proves the other guy's point

>turns into a paragon of peace and love

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." - Matthew 10:34

Also, the 'Love others as you'd love yourself' stuff only applied to fellow jews

>>5229861
yeah but...to be fair the author of matthew was a jew nationalist

If you believe in a god you are a genuine retard.

>>5228414
Now this is shitposting.

>>5229445
Hey, at least you remember topics from texts and their general location, which is more than can be said for most. Not being sarcastic here.

nigga do you even gnosis?

>>5228300
Only read a couple of chapters of St. Matthew so far, but Jesus is just adding some more layers to Jahweh's shit.
>Old Lord said no adultery
>if you even look at a bitch, pluck your eye out.
>Old Lord said no stealing
>If you even take anything, cut your hand off.
Doesn't really seem to be toning down. The whole love and peace is mostly just modern hippie ''I want to go to heaven but I don't like rules so I just say I love everyone and that's what God wants'' rambling, I guess.

The only reason the NT has a God at all is because of the cultural context. Jesus belongs with Buddha.

He got his wisdom on his travels to the east after all.

>>5228467
You didn't watch Waterworld yet this season?

>>5228393
You are forever trapped in this dichotomy of analytical and "continental". A word of advice: get over it, there is more to life and philosophy.
Also get rid of the trip.

>>5228658
There are good socialists in the US, as there are in Europe.

>>5229445
>>5229925

He is not a native english speaker. A slavic one is my guess.

>>5228354

And Jesus was a sailer, when he walked upon the water
and he said all men shall be sailers. . .

>>5228658
>since american liberals would be considered social democrats/socialists here in europe.
what in the fuck are you talking about son

While Jude may have a point about the inner continuity of the scriptures, there is an alternative:

Even God is historical.

>>>5228531
So what you're saying is, that in order to prevent religious people from imposing their ideas on society, we have to impose on society the idea that it doesn't matter what religion you belong to as long as you are a nice person?
Can you see the hypocrisy?
You are the "fundamentalist" of your own religion, the religion of "secular niceness". If a Muslim horde were to try and impose Islam on a Western nation, they would be called "crazy fundamentalists", but if a Western nation were to impose "enlightenment, tolerance, peace, democracy" on a Muslim nation, that would be called "freedom" or "liberty" or "civilization"? Well what if the Muslims think that the imposition of Western society is "McDonalds and Walmart fundamentalism"?

You're saying that religious people shouldn't be allowed to impose their ideas on society, but the the idea that religious people shouldn't have a say is itself an idea which is imposed on society.

yes exactly. this is why i love /lit/ than /mu/. people actually have different ideas and its not a contest for validation.

>>5229985

Jude is cherry-picking his evidence like the faggot that he is.

I think our hermeneutical overlord has arrived.

>5229992
meant to greentext sorry :/

>>5229992
Secularism isn't imposed in a "fundamentalist" manner - that is, without evidence in order to fit some kind of narrative - it's serving a very functional purpose: that because there are competing schools of thought (religious values) none of them should take precedence.

If 18 people all want to watch different TV channels and think the others are retarded then just turn the TV off.

>>5228421

>Plagues of Egypt
>3 Lice
>5 Diseased Livestock
>6 Boils
>10 Death of Firstborn

YHWE was originally an old-school tribal war-god. Then Christianity came around and ruined anything.

>>5228343
>>5228360
>>5228377

This. All of this.

>>5228455
Why wouldn't she poop? Being without sin doesn't mean being without bodily functions.

religion is for the weak and cowardly.

>i want to believe hurr

>>5230355
>strong and courageous
>shitpost on lit

The summer heat.

>>5230393
"Shitposts" are unrelated to the thread posts. Since this is just another shit thread, you seem to have made the mistake of thinking his post was a "shitpost", when it is actually related to the shitty thread.

Religion IS for the delusional sheep-minded. They are only cowardly on the subjects that threaten their faith, but fight rather tenaciously to an untimely death in the false belief that it's all just the beginning for them. This foolishness makes them very weak minded.

>>5230569
you're pretty much a shitpost

>>5230622
leave butterfuck alone

>>5229445
God, Nietzschefags are insufferable

I wish these idiots would fuck off from /lit/ with their HURR MORALITY IS WEAKNESS

>>5230733
it's not weakness it's just a bunch of bullshit

>>5230753
Yep, a bunch of bullshit

>>5230762
More bullshit

>>5230762
>posts pic of cynical missionary trying to spread judeo-christian spookery to the last remnants of the pagan world

dude, please

>>5228414
god gettin BTFO

>>5230776
lmao i walk by there all the time

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.738176,-74.035047,3a,75y,200.67h,87.4t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1spQeiYz2od7aSOGt85F-99g!2e0

>>5230762
picked quite arguably the worst moral example

>>5230787

>not knowing the meaning of word 'cynical'
>not wanting most revolutionary athropology found in judeo-christian system of thought to enlighten basic people
>anno domini 2014

>>5230776
Look at all this bullshit

>>5230894
>enlighten basic people
worked so well in every catholic 3rd world country

>>5230894
>concerned only with one's own interests and typically disregarding accepted or appropriate standards in order to achieve them.

no i'm pretty sure i know what cynical means but you might want to give a quick google since you seem confused

>>5230762
theresa was a legitimate psychopath

>>5230908
>theresa
>army

you have a thing for baby killers? learn to moralfag

>>5230914
>he doesn't know about the Cynics

oh to be a pleb without a classical education

>>5228308
the trinity doesn't exist it was made up by the council of nicea

christ and god are two different entities the holy spirit is there power

>>5231560
>the trinity doesn't exist
>Professes belief in the trinity

jew god is terrible, acts randomly beacause of some divine burocracy, and fucks you badly because he teaches you that life is a bitch but hey, theres still some cool things and contemplations that make it worthwhile

roman christian god is camplately inconsistent and a total bro and resolves the whole existentialist dilemma telling you directly: "be like my son, christ, idolize him, behave cool, this is the whole meaning of our existence" and this is why it was a fucking hit, imagine being a miserable peasant in the roman empire worrying about fuckity god and his wrath and all of a sudden you get like a manual of a hippie god telling you wat you ave to do with our life, fucking sweet

>>5233078
This is actually one of the better responses ITT