/lit/ - Literature

jesus walkin on the water, sweet jesus walkin in the sky

God I love God so much!

I love Him so much it makes me want to oppress homosexuals, women and people with a different worldview than my own!

What the fuck happened to God? His official artwork went from classy stuff like >>868287 to crap like >>868293.

>>868302

>What the fuck happened to God? His official artwork went from classy stuff like >>868287 to crap like >>868293.

You can blame the protestants for that.
Traditional biblical exegesis was divided into a fourfold scheme: literal, tropological(moral), allegorical, and anagogical. The protestants forcefully severed themselves from the latter two in their quest to free themselves from Catholicism. The idea was to remove historical accretions by creating a more textual Christianity.

In recent years the historical(literal) meaning of the Bible has come under attack. This leaves the Protestants willing to accept scholarly research with only one last form of Biblical truth--the moral meaning.

This is why much of North-American Christianity is characterized by a touchy feely sentimental moralism.

The whole thing is really sad. :(

>>868496

Are you saying that it's sad that the artwork is gone, or that the protestants have nothing to fall back on?

Maybe I wouldn't have a problem understanding if I wasn't slightly buzzed due to it being the 4th.

I have never had a Christian, Jew, Muslim (or any other religious person) try to convert me.

I have listend to dozens of athiests bore me to death with their ranting, though.

>>868530

>Are you saying that it's sad that the artwork is gone, or that the protestants have nothing to fall back on?
Both

>>868532

Well then those atheists were shitheads if they approached you. If you approached them, then you deserve a good rant. I'll by all means ridicule someone for coming up to me with their brand of faith, but I sure as hell ain't going to stoop to approaching complete strangers and ridiculing them as sinners/morally corrupt/inherently evil, etc.

I have never been approached by anyone who has the tiniest fragment of a clue about their own book, so forgive me for ridiculing them for their stupidity

>>868549
Why is it sad they have nothing to fall back on then?

>>868573
Bill Hicks was wrong about everything. Grow up.

awesome dante and virgil looking into the multifoliate rose!

I like God. Most of y'all don't understand him too well, I think.

>>868573
fuck yeah man! you gotta show them how stupid they are!!

--------------------------
roll roll roll a joint, twist it at the end, light it up, take a puff and pass it to your friend
be yourself!! dont let other people force you to be who you dont want to be!

>>868576

>Why is it sad they have nothing to fall back on then?
The more intellectual Protestants notice that you don't need a Bible to be a nice guy. In the end, modern Christian moralism and secular Humanism aren't all that different.

In the past, Christians of a more intellectual bent had a rich metaphysical system to explore. Protestants don't really have anything like that to fall back on.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that Protestantism is its own worst enemy--especially today.

>>868573
So you're saying, if an atheist comes up to a theist and starts to tell him he's stupid because he follows beliefs that can't be backed by science, then it's ok, but if a theist comes up to an atheist and tries to convert him then it's ridiculous?

>religious people are so stupid and don't respect other peoples way of life!

>>868601
This is basically the way atheists view it. Except for the part where atheism isn't backed up by science either, and is more of a hypothesis than anything.

>>868293
fucking post-second vatican council secularism bro!

>>868608
Not to mention that pinning any belief system, be it theism or atheism, under name of "science" is truly ridiculous, because true belief don't need no proofs: you either believe in God or don't, and that's all.

>>868608
It's the logical position ;_;

>>868601
This.
Fucking losers in their early twenties who think they're absolute geniuses and everyone else is stupid believe this is perfectly acceptable.

>>868613

Aie. Modern Catholics are no better than their Protestant brothers. :(

>>868608
>Except for the part where atheism isn't backed up by science either
Of course it is.

An atheist doesn't rule out the possibility of any religion being right, but considers it too unlikely to waste his life practising any.

Atheism does not say "a god doesn't exist", atheism says "Due to a lack of evidence I consider the possibility of a god existing to be very unlikely".

>>868601

Different annon. You might want to reread that anons comment.

>Well then those atheists were shitheads if they approached you. If you approached them, then you deserve a good rant.

If you approach total strangers, you are an asshat, regardless of your religion (or lack thereof). What is wrong in ridiculing someone for approaching you and leaping down your throat.

I am all for debates, but when I am out picking up gas to mow my lawn I don't want to have anyone in my face about their personal brand of morality/god/whatever.

People with faith believe that God exists outside science and logic.
Telling them God is not scientific or logical is pointless.

/thread

>>868601
The atheist has evidence (or rather: lack of evidence) on his side, so it's the reasonable position.

>>868636

>People with faith believe that God exists outside science and logic.
Outside of the empirical realm? Yes.
Outside the bounds of logic? Not exactly.

>>868639
>FUCK YOU I CAN BE AN ASSHOLE BECAUSE I KNOW IM RIGHT

>>868601

Nice reading comprehension bro. Way to completely misunderstand what I said.

>>868639

>I don't believe in music because I can't smell it. It makes perfect scientific sense.

>>868626
Most of em' anyways.

Im catholic myself, but i prefer renaissance, or eastern orthodox iconography.

>>868636
Such an understanding of a god does not match with most religious scriptures though.

Most of them paint a different picture of a god.

You cannot rule out the general possibility of the supernatural existing (whether it be a god, magic unicorns, santa claus or whatever), but you can counter specific religions.

I don't see any problem with people believing that a god might exist. I see a problem where they model their lives, their children's lives, and at times even affect other people's lives with arbitrary rules from books which were obviously written by people, not by gods.

>>868649

Yeah, Orthodox icons are beautiful.

The East had the best pictorial art, and the West had the best architecture(Gothic churches!) in my opinion.

>>868630
>An atheist doesn't rule out the possibility of any religion being right, but considers it too unlikely to waste his life practising any.

Maybe you don't, but it's been my experience that the majority of true blue atheists do just that.

>>868654
Oh yes. I love me some russian orthodox chant too man. Especially the one with really low voices. its chilling!

>>868661

Indeed

>>868647
You can't smell it, but you can hear it. And if you were deaf you could see it graphed on paper, if you were also blind, you could still feel it when the volume is pumped up.

All science is based on the premise that what we can perceive with out senses is the truth, and it's a reasonable position because it works. Reliably.

If you jump off a cliff, you'll fall. We can describe that fall, determine the point and time of impact.

Religion on the other hand does not work reliably. Prayer does not reliably cure people. Miracles usually don't happen.

That's the difference.

>>868657
I don't know what kind of people you've met, but even Richard Dawkins doesn't rule out the possibility of a god existing, he just considers it to be very slim.

>>868636
This is the very definition of faith: a belief in things unseen and unproven. That's not to say that I personally don't believe that God is illogical or can't be scientific, it's just not relevant to whether I believe in a deity or not.

>>868643
I don't know whether I'm right or not, but lack of evidence for yours says that my position is more likely.

>>868677
And, with that: seeking a proof to everything, you completely miss the point of believing.

>>868680
But why believe at all?

>>868668

>All science is based on the premise that what we can perceive with out senses is the truth
Yes, but does it follow that all truth is perceivable? Not really...

>>868682
Because you can't help it. A still small voice, a void that's been filled by the only thing it can be filled by, there's probably a million different reasons for each individual person. Just don't buy into the idea that everyone that follows does so blindly.

the scientific method is just a tool guys

>>868684
Of course not, but it's the only way for us to ascertain any truth at all (under that premise).

>>868682

>But why believe at all?
So that I may come to understand.

>>868691
Understand what?

>You will seek me and find me
Who? God? Maybe if I decide to kill the stupid fucker, but as I don't think I'm in a position to do that, I'll just vie him the finger from here.

>>868690

>it's the only way for us to ascertain any truth at all
People often say this is if it were self-evident, but it really isn't. Plenty of great people have believed that higher realities can be grasped with the higher mental faculties.

>>868685
>everyone that follows does so blindly.
In the end that's what they do though. Believe is always based on an assumption.

>>868682
>>868693
>I'm going to keep saying WHY until he sounds stupid!

I know you think this is very clever, but you just sound ignorant.

>>868695
\m/ hardcore!!! \m/

>>868693

>Understand what?
Theological claims and doctrinal truths. The important stuff.

>>868699
Not really. It's one thing to be blind, and it's another to see God around enough to the point where there's not much you can do to not believe in him. It's all perception.

>>868699

>Believe is always based on an assumption.
Belief has trust as its starting point. Is trust really that bad?

>>868698
>higher realities
"Higher realities" for which there is no evidence at all. Why bother with "higher" realities when there is our current one which we can be sure of?

>>868699


this is really not true at all.

a hypothesis begins with an assumption, then you test that assumption using the scientific method

faith is completely different.

>>868704

this guy sounds like someone you should listen to

COOL BOOK THREAD, GUYS

SERIOUSLY, THOSE BOOKS, HUH?

>>868704
>to see God around
But how to you know it's not your eyes playing a trick on you?

For pretty much anything we can see we have ways of double checking whether it's actually there or not.

We can ask others if they can see it too, we can get close to it, take a look at it from different sides, we can take a picture, use measuring devices for further analysis, ...

>>868710

pretty sure the bible was mentioned

>>868714


doing all that shit doesnt change your experience

>>868704

So you're saying you're unable to imagine how the world got to the way it is without god? You are unable to see an existence shaped solely by the laws of nature?

>>868700
>I'm going to be vague and make use of platitudes to avoid answering his question

>>868720


why are the two mutually exclusive?

>>868718
The lunatic who thinks he's Napoleon could say the same.

>>868724

> The lunatic who thinks he's Napoleon could say the same.
How many people believe they are lunatics?
How many people believe they've been in contact with the divine in some way?

>>868724

> The lunatic who thinks he's Napoleon could say the same.
How many people believe they are Napoleon ?
How many people believe they've been in contact with the divine in some way?

>>868714
I don't mean literally seeing God. If there's one thing I truly understand about God, it's that he's literally beyond our understanding. Trying to pin him into an easily digestible box will never happen. That's why I completely get not believing in God. I don't really care about trying to, either. I just know that at some point, something inside me changed the very nature of who I am, and I've never been the same since.

>>868724
VIVA NAPOLEON!

Meister Eckhart used to say that he could hear God clearing his throat. I think a lot of us can relate to that.

>>868727
>How many people believe they've been in contact with the divine in some way?
Plenty of people also believe they were abducted by aliens.

>>868733

>Plenty of people also believe they were abducted by aliens.
Aliens are physical beings. We would expect to find physical evidence if they were in contact with us.

>>868728
Again, the main problem I have is not with general believe in a god, but with religious believe in a god, based on religious scripture.

We can historically trace these books, when they were written, by whom they were written, we can take a look at syncretisms, elements common between religions of the time, elements which differed, which we can again analyse in socio-historical context to answer the question why they differed; we can tell why certain rules existed and others didn't. We can question dates and events mentioned in these books, etc.

Facts tell us that they were written by people rather than gods.

I have no problem with people believing that a god exists, I do however see a problem with people following these old books too closely, because they do not only contain good things. Obviously, I also have a massive problem with people forcing their beliefs upon their children or even others.

>>868738
No, because they use technology which is much more advanced than ours so they cannot be spotted with our silly technology.

>>868743
>, I also have a massive problem with people forcing their beliefs upon their children or even others.

Parents want their children to believe the same things they do. There is nothing wrong with this.

>>868760
There is something very wrong with this, because children should be allowed to choose.

When they're 18 and still want to join their parents' religious group they can do that.

This thread should have been about awesome religious artwork.

>>868762

>children should be allowed to choose.
Children don't WANT to choose. Kids assume their parent are always right until they start thinking for themselves in their teen years.

>When they're 18 and still want to join their parents' religious group they can do that.
Religious parents have religious kids. You can't stop it. Children emulate their parents.

>>868773
I'm not opposed to parents introducing their kids to their own faith, I'm against having kids to be part of organised religion. Religious initiation rituals like circumcision, etc. should be made illegal.

>>868792

>religious rituals should be made illegal.
Why not ban kids from participating in all rituals? Let's make Christmas and birthday-parties illegal. Not to mention your first shave with dad, or playing catch in the back-yard.

Cain kills his brother Abel.

Jacob wrestles with the angel. - Genesis 32

The angel appears to Balaam. ―Numbers 22

so, how do christians feel about the idea that because god is all powerful, he should be obeyed and worshiped.

>>868800
>Christmas and birthday-parties illegal
>implying those were Christian rituals

>>868815
>HurrDurrr Pagans

Christ Mass is Christian.

>>868809

>so, how do christians feel about the idea that because god is all powerful, he should be obeyed and worshiped.
You mischaracterize Christian beliefs. Read Plantinga's work on warrant.

>>868822
No, it's a pagan holiday adopted by Christians to help convert said pagans.

>>868792

I don't think you understand the consequences of making something illegal that's protected in the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.

http://catholic-resources.org/Art/Dore.htm

>>868792
Yep, the state should be allowed to tell parents what you are allowed to teach your children.

What could go wrong?

derp

>>868848
Shouldn't count here, because children are people and not property. They have rights too.

To cut off their foreskins without a good medical reason or force them into a religious group where they're taught nonsense should be considered assault.

I don't care about what adults do to themselves, but they shouldn't be allowed to do it to their children.

>>868829
no, i think platinga doesn't really understand it. hah!

i created u so u obey me. that's a clear power structure, and it justifies a load of patriarchy and slavery stuff.

>>868855
So parents should be allowed to teach their children whatever they want? What about racist theories? Children who grow up in such an environment probably will never be able to fit with the other kids properly.

Their parents teachings are hurting them, and that should be illegal.

Children are people, not property. The state has to make sure that their rights aren't infringed.

>>868864
agreed

Lesbian Catholic here. I'll admit that I play fast and loose with my personal morals from time to time. I also dislike the Vatican's policy on homosexuals and most conservative Christians' "Mightier than thou" attitude. My homosexuality puts me in a weird place with my community, which is why I haven't attended Mass since I came out.

Also, I can't understand why some people would think that Atheists lack morals. What the hell, people?!

>>868864
I hope you realize how dangerous what you're suggesting is, instead of just assuming the Ministry of Child Raising will agree with you about everything, and therefore be right about everything.

>>868864

>So parents should be allowed to teach their children whatever they want?
Yes. Seriously.

>>868873
slippery slope fallacy

>>868864

Agreed. It's OK only if it's sensible shit like not cutting your dick off or eating raw meat. Personal beliefs should be up for the kid to decide.

>>868877
so you have no respect for your children's personal choices and humanity. gotcha.

sounds about right though, from the prolife crowd

>>868864
Hey, it's bad that children are being taught these things, but it's the right of the parents to believe and to say whatever they want. Will this always result in good people? No.

But if you think you can write up a guideline of what children and their parents should be thinking... then you've just become an enemy of free thought. And you don't want that, right?

>>868881
Sorry if I don't trust some angsty religion haters to tell the difference between what is harmful and what is merely unpleasant to them.

Yeah! We should let the government control what parents are allowed to teach their kids!

>>868881

And I'm loving it. I don't mind if I go to Hell for being with a woman that I love.

>>868883

>so you have no respect for your children's personal choices
What if the kids choose to go to church?

>>868889
"Daddy, why do birds sing so beautifully?"

"Because the Party is great!"

I think tech children Marx with fists!

>>868902
Whooo!

>>868876
If said ministry of child raising is bound by the constitution and properly controlled, I see no problem.

In fact, a ministry of child raising already exists, and they will take your children away if you hurt them bodily to a certain extent. I am considering to the same if a child's mental health is in danger.

Everyone just rejects what their parents believe when they're whiney teenagers who think they know it all.

Son, God loves us all very much.
>fuck you dad I read 12 books saying god isnt real and you and everyone else is stupid!
Son, we are most likely alone in the universe, and our existence is a purely scientific one.
>fuck you dad you never gave me a chance to believe in anything, Im joining the church

>>868928
Agreed!

>>868885
the idea that parents own children is already passe. you get charged for murder if you kill your kid, ja?

as such, there is already acknowledged legitimacy for "outside" input into the care of children. if a religious practice is harmful enough, of course it should be stopped in order to protect the kids. or do you think something like female genital mutilation or the binding of feet for women should be allowed because they are cultural practices?

btw, the motivation here is not religion hating. it's simply child protection.

>>868893
sorry, i swear i quoted another post. what the fuck

>>868896
that, my dear watson, would be a separate and distinct question!

>>868873
Why not convert to a different faith? Catholicism is obviously not a good choice for homosexuals.

>>868946

>if a religious practice is harmful
Give me some Christian examples.

>>868959
>I have no idea how faith works

>>868974
slavery

>>868959

yeah, why don't you just go to the faith-store and get yourself another religion

hurr duurrr derp

>>868959

I've considered that. I'm too familiar with attending my cousins' Confirmation and Sunday Mass to just give it up like that. Going to another congregation would mean that I would have to relearn everything. Converting to another religion completely still wouldn't solve how people still have issues with homosexuality. And I love God, as unfair as He is.

Maybe I'll convert eventually. But not yet.

>>868982
All your credibility just got sucked into a jet engine

>>868896
Difficult issue, because kids technically can't "choose" because they're legally immature thus unable to choose for themselves. Generally, I'm not against children going to church, I'm more against introducing them as full members of a certain religion, certain religious rituals inflicting bodily harm on them, parents home schooling them and teaching them nonsense etc. Obviously, children being completely kept away from religion is impossible when their parents are religious.

>>868982

Slavery is already illegal.
Give me an example of a Christian practice currently not-unheard of.

>>868988
God is necessarily revelatory because he's not envious!

>>868992
surprised that your religion evolves, eh?

>>868532
>>868532
>>868532
>>868532
>>868532
>>868532
>>868532
>>868532
>>868532
why the fuck didn't the thread end here?

>>868995

>kids technically can't "choose"
That's why this whole "child freedom" issue is retarded.

>>868976
Well, if you're incompatible with a religion's teachings based on your lifestyle, and you feel your lifestyle is right rather than wrong, then the problem obviously lies with your religion. There are other interpretations of Christianity around, so if you don't want to give up on Christian faith you could at least take a look at them and see if they make sense to you.

>>868997
the point is that religious standards of justified practice does not stem from fixed religious doctrine but evolves with social and cultural standards. you do understand that things like the inquisition and whatnot existed, right?

>>868857

Assault? You're a lawyer's dream you know.

Client: "My parents cut off my foreskin when I was an infant, and then you know what they did? They...they...sent me to church!"

Lawyer: "Mother of God"

Client: "I know! It was terrible! I can't think for myself now, and my dick is sooooo dry!"

Lawyer: "Don't worry. We're gonna sue the shit out of your parents and get you lots of money."

At this point the lawyer and the client slap hands.

Tort reform? Fuck no this is America! And here we complain about our rights because they restrict our rights.

>>869011

What does any of this have to do with banning kids from going to church?

>>869008
not really, because it can be framed as an issue of welfare and proper nurture, rather than one of rights of the child itself.

>>869021
not a fucking thing, as far as i can tell. which is also why i wasn't talking about banning kids from going to church.

You know the Kitlers thread is now much more interesting than this one.

>>868997
The point is that you're deliberate ignoring parts of your religions teachings wherever you please. Pretty much all people do this. Religious teaching is put through a filter of our contemporary moral understanding, which is NOT based on arbitrary religious dogma but on reason.

>>869023

>of welfare and proper nurture
These have traditionally been understood in a material sense. Food and housing etc.

>>869008
No, not at all. It can be argued whether parents are making the right choices after all. Despite their immaturity, inflicting harm upon your children is still illegal.

>>869032
>contemporary moral understanding based on reason.
Would be nice.

>>869033
look up mandatory education laws. traditionally? i'm sorry, you are off by a few centuries.

>>869032

Some parts of the Bible record historical information.
Slavery was once a part of life. Just because slavery is in the Bible, doesn't mean that slavery is somehow a Christian practice. Where do you people get the idea that everything mentioned is condoned?

>>869033
And whether children are raised properly should be considered too.

How do you think would a child being taught that homosexuals are the spawn of the devil would fit into our current society?

What do you think about those "god hates fags" people? Is it right for them to deny their children a normal life?

>>869010

Good point. I'll look into it, just in case.

>>869055
because thus said the lord, go forth and slaughter the cannites and make teh land your own. etc etc

>>869055
There are countless other parts which are also ignored, and it's not exclusive to Christianity. All religious scripture contains elements which simply have no place in our current society. This is because they were most likely written by people rather than omniscient and wise gods.

>>869064

>cannites
Are the Cannites still around? How is this passage relevant to today exactly?

>>869055
and of course, the shifting interpretation of these passages is how theology deals with shifting moral standards that source from outside of itself. i can perfectly construct a justification of homosexuality etc etc etc from the bible just fine, and if christians actually move to a point where they are no longer homophobic, the gay friendly reading will be adopted as the authentic Word.

>>869059
For the record, I think teaching hate specifically is illegal in many places. If it isn't, it ought to be. There will always be those who claim that teaching morality falls under that definition, but I have hope that a half decent court could tell the difference.

>>869064
The cannites(sic) are the reason there was a law specifically forbidding child sacrifice.

>>869073
so teh god that condoned genocides is a different god from the one you worship

gotcha

i'm toobusy raging at the yankees third base coach to chat with you'all. havea good day.

>>869109
onionring i should have known you'd be a yankees fan

Oh well, it's not like this debate has any relevence outside of America

How the hell do you raise kids if the parents are too incompetent?
They might send them to church in the same way they might get them fat by spoiling them or might put them on a pedestal so everyone else has to.

Do we confiscate kids and let a private entity raise them away from their horribly religious evil parents?
You create a disassociated generation of retard who think science has (capabilities or actualities aside) all the answers.

I'm content to just say at times "I don't know". Why does it have to be one or the other?

>>869122
aye. new yorker

It makes me sad that such a beautiful engraving was used to spark a troll thread.

Gustave would be disappoint.

>>868853
wow, an actual artwork of this passage.