/lit/ - Literature

ok

>>>/x/

Agreed.

Praise be unto the Lord.

>>6963493

All other Bible versions are fakes? Does that include the Latin and Greek texts used to create the KJV?

>>6963493

>>6963493
What denomination would you say most closely models this?

I know that the entire point of your post is that Christianity exists outside of religion, but entertain the thought experiment, if you will.

New Catholicism

Are you a Christian because you're scared of eternal damnation or because you want to believe there's something there after you die?

>>6964739
Aren't those two things related?

I am a christian for neither of those reasons. In my experience only non christians and other non religious people believe those are reasons for belief, which says more about them than it does about Christianity tbh.

>Protestants

>>6963493
>There is only One form of Christianity
Wrong.

>>6964770
Oh but he's totally correct on the kjv being authoritative?

GG spotting the troll butterfly, this is why you're the worst trip here.

>>6963493

OP, you fucking cuck, respond to this.
>>6964286

>>6964830

Everyone else already pointed that out.

>>6964770
>wrong
Do you still believe there is any serious form of christianity aside Catholicism? Protestant denominations are more of a boy scouts club or a book club than a church.

>>6965547
O r t h o d o x y

>>6965558
You're right, I always forget the East.
Still, kind of the same thing on the basis.

>>6963493
>and only one Bible, the 1611 KJV
Luther's translation is much better though.

>>6965547
>Protestant denominations are more of a boy scouts club or a book club than a church.
In what sense? I am not even religious, and you are probably just trying to banter, but why are catholics looking down on protestants? I know protestants are looking down on catholics for believing in the pope and all that non-biblical stuff.

>>6965581
Sola Fide is laughable and heretical all at once.
The point of Protestantism is the creation of more space for the secular, which is really hard for me to get behind.

>>6965581
Ask the Oxford Movement or, more recently, Scott Hann.
Any educated protestant ends up being catholic.

>>6965592
>going to mention a convert
>choose to mention Scott Hann before Dietrich Von Hildebrand

c'mon

>>6965581
Think of the biggets atheist philosophers, which form of christianity do they consider their biggest enemy?

tip: not the american liberal denominations that have women pastors or transgender bishops, those aren't worth their time.

>>6965591
What's so laughable about sola fide? Keep in mind that you believe in God. Which is laughable aswell. (I don't want to insult you here, I am just trying to make you explain your arguments better.)

And as far as I can tell, the roman catholicism is much more secularist than protestantism. Or, to explain it better, leaves much more room for it, since in catholic doctrine, a marriage has to be blessed to be accepted by the church, while in protestantism it doesn't. Catholicism makes a clear divide between heaven and earth, while in protestantism this divide is not there, or atleast not as noticable.

>>6965592
I know many educated protestants who are not catholic.

>>6965626
So?

>>6965630
>Keep in mind that you believe in God
Says who? I never claimed to be an atheist. I unironically Christpost all the time. I'm Catholic.
>Or, to explain it better, leaves much more room for it, since in catholic doctrine, a marriage has to be blessed to be accepted by the church, while in protestantism it doesn't.
You'll have to explain how all this makes Catholicism more secular. Maintaining marriage as a sacred institution certainly seems to bring God into the process, and Luther claimed that marriage was just another terrestrial thing that had nothing to do with God, hence the Protestant inclination to divorce.
>Catholicism makes a clear divide between heaven and earth, while in protestantism this divide is not there, or atleast not as noticable.
What does this even mean?

>>6965630
>I know many educated protestants who are not catholic.

Well, depends on what you consider "educated". A 4-year degree and attending church on sundays does not make you an educated christian

>>6965636
>>Keep in mind that you believe in God
Says who? I never claimed to be an atheist. I unironically Christpost all the time. I'm Catholic
I misread your post, my mistake. Sola Fide is laughable because it implies that, if Adolf Hitler believed in Christ, he would be saved, despite the crimes he committed against humanity and all his violations of God's law. Protestantism lets anyone get away with anything while still promising salvation. Faith and works is the only truly moral path one can believe in, so long as one remembers that 'works' are actions that grow the Kingdom of God on earth.

>>6965630
If you try to follow development of theology you will notice how protestant theology and Catholic theology influenced by it becomes more and more secular, to the point of trying to dich the scripture to make people feel nicer, which is really not the point of the whole thing.
German Catholic church for example is on the verge of a big schism in doctrine and possibly structure.

>>6965637
There is no need for us Catholics to needlessly shit on everything Christian. They are our brothers in Christ, in many things more orthodox than many of our bishops, heck possibly our pope, but I really hope that isn't the case.

>>6965591
So did Jesus when he said "render unto Caesar". Jesus didn't come to create the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth, he came to save individual souls. The society or church doesn't matter, as long as mankind is saved.

>>6965643
God wants you in Heaven, but if you sin as direly as Hitler did, he's not going to.

>>6965659
You can sin much less, for example remarry and not confess and its strongly indicated you'll go to hell. In many places it is written that only a few will get to haven, saying differently is ignoring the scripture, which also speaks directly against sola fide.

>>6965630
>What's so laughable about sola fide?
Sola Fide in a nutshell: What you DO doesn't matter, as long as you say you believe in Christ and are in the right church (a.k.a no catholic church) Thanks Luther for abolishing ethics.

>I know many educated protestants who are not catholic.
Man, people here are talking about JH Newman, D. von Hildebrand and you can add Chesterton or Tolkien or Lewis... No offense but thats not the average college graduate, you're discussing different ideas of "educated"

hi

>>6965636
>Says who? I never claimed to be an atheist. I unironically Christpost all the time. I'm Catholic.
Yes. So you believe in God, right? Because that is what I said.

>You'll have to explain how all this makes Catholicism more secular.
>seems to bring God into the process
Exactly. God has to be brought into the process. It makes the appearance that he is not there in the first place.

>>6965637
So, no one is an educated chrisitan? Teaching at universities surely is a sign of education, right? And don't try to pull a no true scotsman on me.

>church

>>6963493
No.You don't know what you're talking about and crying harder doesn't make it true

>>6965681
>And don't try to pull a no true scotsman on me
Man, you cannot compare your friend who once taught Chemistry 101 to Edith Stein

>>6965673
>Sola Fide in a nutshell: What you DO doesn't matter, as long as you say you believe in Christ and are in the right church (a.k.a no catholic church) Thanks Luther for abolishing ethics.
Well, God loves you unconditionally.

>Man, people here are talking about JH Newman, D. von Hildebrand and you can add Chesterton or Tolkien or Lewis... No offense but thats not the average college graduate, you're discussing different ideas of "educated"
I am talking about people who doctors aswell, not just graduates.
And Tolkien was a philologist, not a theologist, why do you list him here?

>>6965697
>Well, God loves you unconditionally.
You summed it up perfectly, thats exactly what Sola Fide is all about. The abolition of ethics.

>>6965695
Yes, and? I am talking about people who teach at universities as professors with a doctor title, who are protestants (or to be precise, evangelist).
That stuff is actually a thing in academia, but you claim none of these guys is educated?

>>6965697
God loves you unconditionally indeed, but love God has isn't some new age bullshit. It includes perfect justice and responsibility due to the gift of reason and free will.
Meaning you will accordingly suffer or look upon the face of God.
And not the anon, but the fact that Tolkien wasn't a theologian doesn't mean his ideas are not worth looking at theologically.

>>6965659
The Kingdom is like a mustard seed that grows to enormous size.

How can an eternal Kingdom grow? The eternal is eternally static. The only way the Kingdom could grow would be in time, on Earth.

>>6965681
>It makes the appearance that he is not there in the first place.
Only if you commit the heresy of denying God's omnipresence.

>>6965703
Well, ethics are subjective, so it seems like a reasonable idea, right?

>>6965709
>God loves you unconditionally indeed, but love God has isn't some new age bullshit. It includes perfect justice and responsibility due to the gift of reason and free will.
>Meaning you will accordingly suffer or look upon the face of God.
I see.

>And not the anon, but the fact that Tolkien wasn't a theologian doesn't mean his ideas are not worth looking at theologically.
Please read the conversation before replying to it. That anon seemed like he tried to make a list of the most educated catholics in the world, but then he runs out of people who studied the subject on the third entry?

>>6965716
Sooo, catholics are heretics?

>>6965706
Give them time, if they are reasonable people they will end up converting to catholicism or at least leaving their childish religion.

Anyway, there are thousands of idiots holding a PhD. We're in /lit, we know not everybody who writes a book or teaches anything is worth considering intellectually worthy

>>6965719
>ethics are subjective
Great. Let's burn all of Kant's work (and half of western philosophy).

You lutherans are quite funny, see why any educated person cannot take protestantism seriously?

>>6965713
Because more people join in the Kingdom from the seed of Jesus. not talking literally here, evangelical tradition, prophets, John the Baptist etc
And there's nothing in the Bible that suggests that the Kingdom of Heaven isn't something that will be created during Revelations.

>>6965721
No, Catholics believe that the Church is God's presence on earth and that the sacraments are the way to God. They also believe that God is omnipresent. However, this presence can be either passive or active. God as Being is everywhere, but Christ as He is present in the Eucharist is present only in the Eucharist.

>>6963493
It's true, if the english language was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me!

>>6965719
>I'm a Christian, but I'm not a moral absolutist
This is exactly what Protestantism leads to.
>>6965734
The New Jerusalem is different from the Kingdom that Christ instituted with His Resurrection.

>>6965739
>The New Jerusalem is different from the Kingdom that Christ instituted with His Resurrection.
Meant for >>6965732

Let's settle this: /lit is in general quite atheist, but every now and then theres a thread about Aquinas or St.Agustine, just because they are respectable thinkers, that actually make sense.

The excuses of a monk who wanted some pussy and wrote a shitload of fallacies to be able to get it are not worth reading, mate.

>>6965741
Jesus never called for a state. Rebellious and Jewish rebels did, and Saul wanted a state because it was how he knew how to run things but not Jesus.

>>6965742
If you're talking about Martin Luther, he's literally the most important person since Christ.

>>6965742
Or maybe /lit/ isn't generally atheist?

>>6965751
The Kingdom isn't a state. You were the first one to make that association, not me.
Martin Luther was a heretic and nothing more.

>>6965719
How a Christian can be a moral subjectivist is beyond. Logos is a single thing and God himself left you absolute rules to life that could and can be and will be applicable to every possible situation.
>>6965751
Luther is important in the complete opposite way of Christ, one gave you the truth and the other a lie.

>>6965724
Well, there still isn't much of an argument _why_ they will switch. You are just randomly insulting people.

>We're in /lit, we know not everybody who writes a book or teaches anything is worth considering intellectually worthy
Exactly, so why is Scott Hann?

>>6965730
Why do you now throw ad personams around? Why do you guys never read conversations before replying to them? I never said I am lutheran or protestant.

And ethics being subjective isn't that big of a surprise these days, in case you did not notice. Kant was a clever guy, and many of the things he said are worth discussing, but not every one of his words is still 100% correct and absolute. We have built on what he said, that does not mean we agree with everything.

>>6965734
I see. And why is that so?

>>6965739
>>I'm a Christian, but I'm not a moral absolutist
>This is exactly what Protestantism leads to.
Well good thing I am not a protestant.

>>6965759
I think it is, actually.

>>6965762
>>6965764
LMAO say all you want about Luther hurting your feelings because the Pope couldn't buy the new golden hat he wanted 500 years ago, but Luther single handedly changed European history.

>>6965764
>How a Christian can be a moral subjectivist is beyond. Logos is a single thing and God himself left you absolute rules to life that could and can be and will be applicable to every possible situation.
That is, if you read the bible literally.

>>6965765

>Exactly, so why is Scott Hann?
Recognition from peers. It may not be perfect, nor infallible, but thats the way we consider Hemingway's work valuable (even if you dont like it).

You might add: but why is there a consensus that hemingway is superior to John Green? >reasons.

Can we agree on that? Can we agree that catholic thinkers have been more important that protestants?

>>6965774
It's what you get if you read it with any kind of understanding.
But tell me, which of the Logos is wrong now?
>>6965770
He changed history, undoubtedly for the worse, I never denied that.

>>6965770
Whether or not be changed history, he was still pig disgusting.

>>6965765
>And why is that so?
Because the alternative is a hole where the well-educated clergy would be, a hole that is filled by uneducated literalism whenever it's allowed to pop up.

The true monotheistic religion is Judaism. I can't believe non-Jewish adherents of Abrahamic religions still haven't realized their faiths are a cheap Chinese knockoff.

Protestantism was not born due to doctrinal disagreement, therefore it is not a sound philosophical or theological school: because it wasn't its purpose.

If you have read about Luther's life you will know how profoundly biographical his "theology" is. His doctrine on marriage is based on that he and the german nobles wanted to marry and remarry freely. His doctrine on salvation (sola fides) is based on his inability to live according to the catholic morals. Sola Scriptura is based on the need to be independent, so not recognizing te authority of the Church or the Pope, or the Magisterium.

He was not worried by Truth, he focused on the practical side. No surprise the german nobels who desired independence from the Church accepted it so quickly.

>>6965779
But Hemmingway was a hack who only got the Nobel because everyone noteworthy at the time already had it. As someone who studies literature, I have never met someone who considers Hemmingway's works particularly valuable.
Bad example there, buddy.

Anyway, yes, there were more important catholic thinkers, but for the bigger part of catholicism protestants did not even exist, so there is that.

>>6965780
>It's what you get if you read it with any kind of understanding.
Ah, okay, if you do it the way you like it, it is correct.

>But tell me, which of the Logos is wrong now?
Wrong-right is a different dychotomy than relative-absolute.

>>6965782
Please elaborate. Or is this just another case of "I don't like B so A must be true."?

>>6965789

This tbh

I'm reading literature on Jewish myths and kabbalah and shit is 200x more interesting than all that Christian moralistic fan fiction bullshit.

>>6965795
Ignoring the thing with the indulgences and how church had become a concrete worldly power rather than a spiritual one, how does this discredit protestantism today?

I could aswell say christianity was born from people's fear of death, so what?

>>6965798
>Please elaborate
There's a lot of crazy shit in the Bible. If everyone is an equal authority on what it all means, anyone can make any passage mean anything. The alternative is an enforced doctrine taught to the laity by eductaed clergy. It is a matter of 'either A or B' because, historically, that's the way it's turned out to be.

>>6965818
>If everyone is an equal authority on what it all means, anyone can make any passage mean anything.
Yes, so? That's the way it is as far as I am concerned.

>>6965827
Well, you're wrong. It's that simple.

>>6965828
Says you. But the world contradicts you, with all the people running around with the ability to make any passage mean anything.

>>6965795

Protestants say they believe something but have no problem believing the opposite tomorrow, that doesnt seem very consistent.

Catholics are admirable, they have their own philosophy and theology and don't give a damn about what is politically correct. They got a view of what things are and they are not going to change them depending on whats the current "philosophical fashion"..

I like that, I think it is coherent. Protestant cool-wannabe-ism is disgusting.

>>6965836
They can interpret them however they want. Only those who interpret Scripture to accord with the interpretation propagated by the RCC's Magesterium are correct, though.

>>6965841
In other words, they distanced themselves so far from the world that they live in their own reality alltogether?

>>6965848
You forgot the quotation marks around "correct".

>>6965861
You clearly aren't a Christian, so your idea of what's correct is lacking in the first place.

>>6965836
It is a matter of intellectual honesty:

I can read The Extranger by Camus and interpret it, but I am not such an idiot to claim my interpretations are as good and as valid as some critical edition that takes into account the time it was written, the life of the writer, his other works, his correspondance, the links with other contemporaneous works...

That is protestantism and self-interpretation vs catholic interpretation with patristic, magisterium, tadition and hermeneutic.

>>6965798
Yes my way is correct. And Logos does not exist in a relativistic settings, the whole point of the word is the absolute.
So yeah, where is the Logos relative, wrong.
>>6965872
Also this, you enter a worldview with little knowledge or understanding of it and argue, because idk contrarians exist.

>>6965861
>In other words, they distanced themselves so far from the world that they live in their own reality alltogether?

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others. - Groucho Marx

You can criticize them, but at leaast they are honest enough to not water down their beliefs to please other.

>>6965872
Well, christian thought is not really relevant anymore in the 20th and 21st century.

We will just continue to rant at each other about this point now, won't we?

>>6965877
>That is protestantism and self-interpretation vs catholic interpretation with patristic, magisterium, tadition and hermeneutic.
But protestantism is not sheer self-interpretation, no matter how much you want to make that distinction between you and them. It has its own tradition and hermeneutics.

>>6965879
>the whole point of the word is the absolute.
That's your way of reading it.

>Also this, you enter a worldview with little knowledge or understanding of it and argue, because idk contrarians exist.
Well, I asked a question and got rather superficial answers. One thing lead to another and suddenly we had a discussion. You know, the things these boards are for.

>>6965900
>It has its own tradition and hermeneutics
Yeah, based on Luther's desire of a wife

Rastafarians have their own tradition and hermeneutics too, real scientific approach.

>>6965907
Yeah, and catholicism is based on desire for power. Now what?

>>6965900
>Well, christian thought is not really relevant anymore in the 20th and 21st century
That's a highly contestable claim.

>>6965915
So is Protestantism, my Nietzschean friend. Everything is a product of the will to power.

>>6964751
> eternal damnation
>In my experience only non christians and other non religious people believe those are reasons for belief,

Bullshit. Ministers preach hellfire from the pulpit all the time.

>>6965929
So, religion is not about God, but about worldly things instead?

>>6965941
If you don't believe in God, why would you believe any religion is about God?

>>6963493
>NU-UH, MYYYY RELIGION IS THE TRUE ONE! MINE IS TRUEST!

>>6965941

Why did that take you so long to figure out? Isn't the fact that Christians never give their possessions to the poor a massive hint.

People on here are only 'christian' out of perceived benefits. When they actually have to do some effort for their beliefs, or be exposed to some risks, then suddenly they instantly use muh poetics, muh context and muh metaphors as comfortable excuses, all to not run actual risks. Pretty strange for a religion that condemns the even slightly disobedient to eternal hellfire

>>6965900
It isn't my idea of reading it. Why do you think the evangelist used the word Logos? Because he connected and expanded upon greek philosophy with Christian ideas.
He didn't use it because he wanted it to sound nice. It's not my way of reading it, it's how the author intended it to be read, meaning correct way.

>>6965963
I don't, but religions claim they are about God.

Man, we are getting pretty tippy here, so I just want to clarify that I only think this holds true about organized religion, not about every single individual who is religious.

>>6965975
>Why did that take you so long to figure out?
It didn't, but your idea of religion is rather superficial aswell.

>>6965915
How is Catholic doctrine the product of desire for power exactly?
Especially considering it didn't always have the power and orthodox having almost the exact doctrine despite being separated for a thousand years.