/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11089103]

>Read the Old Testament
>Full of God being a schizo and telling people how to fence in their cattle
>Ok maybe the New Testament will clear things up
>Read New Testament
>Gospels contradict each other, epistles quote scripture that doesn't exist and say the world should have ended already
>Ok maybe the church fathers will clear things up
>Start reading the Church Fathers
>Ignatius of Antioch says the Ephesian church is eternal (Ephesus doesn't exist anymore), Justin Martyr believes a bunch of bullshit legends and misquotes both scripture and Plato, and so on
>Ok maybe some modern apologetics will clear things up
>GK Chesterton is pure rhetoric, CS Lewis' arguments collapse immediately, Tim Keller gets basic factual stuff wrong, NT Wright just assumes it's all true and starts talking about how to organise churches
Is Christianity, dare I say it, wrong?

[Anonymous No.11089122]

>>11089103
what is the perfect ideology that you are contrasting with Christianity?

[Anonymous No.11089132]

>>11089103
>Is Christianity, dare I say it, wrong?
No. I mean, I don't know if it's right but I do know it's not wrong.

[Anonymous No.11089137]

it's almost like all of these things are man's doing, and there is no divine editor.

[Anonymous No.11089141]

>>11089103
yes

[Anonymous No.11089183]

>>11089103
Imagine people learning about Islam a couple centuries in the future, and trying to figure out what happened today. Then trying to compare that with all the bullshit Islamic scholars write. Will it be a coherent picture of what it really is? Will they be able to draw any concrete conclusions? Mind that there is data from non-Muslims, and everything can be understood as an us vs. them situation. I'm sure future scholars will argue Islam was misunderstood etc. That's exactly what we see about Christianity from our modern standpoint. A pile of bullshit only those who are biased can make sense of.

[Anonymous No.11089196]

>>11089103
Where do the Gospels contradict each other?

[Anonymous No.11089215]

>>11089122
anything else like soft panpsychist materialism, vitalism, spinozism, naturalistic idealism, vedanta, buddhist ontology. things that are compatible with history, science and philosophy instead of whatever priests say. the difference is these aren’t perfect and don’t claim to be, save for vedanta but its at least logically rigorous and requires almost no magical thinking
>>11089132
you can’t have knowledge something isn’t wrong if you also can’t know if it is right. the possibility of the negative is assured by the lack of evidence for the positive
>>11089183
>only we christians can interpret our bullshit
makes you think

[Anonymous No.11089252]

>>11089215
You seem to be confusing the necessary and the sufficient.

[Anonymous No.11089293]

>>11089252
No not at all. Go back to uni and take a logic course you need a refresher

[Anonymous No.11089317]

>>11089215
Well clearly all of those things, if investigated, have flaws and logical loop holes in which they jump through. My question, of which ideology are you contrasting with Christianity, was aimed at provoking that thought "why are you calling Christianity wrong?" What is your intent? It is a rather vague statement. "Wrong" could be applied to any number of things, so can right be applied to many things. It's first and foremost a work of literature and as such, penned by the hand of man, will be filled with error. Did you derive any gain, even in the slightest, from reading either the old or new testament? Did you go in with an open mind or did you want to spot every error simply to reinforce a belief you already had? Referring to god as a schizo, although humorous, misses the point of that depiction of god. That to man, nature and the world around him is irrational. The Gospels are designed to contradict one another. The first four readings are separate experiences of christ, which don't all align accordingly. Which, I would argue is a reflection found in rashomon, and to similar effect. I think you went in appropriating information to what you already knew rather than approaching it with an open mind and so obscured it.

[Anonymous No.11089324]

>>11089293
If something is necessary, but may not be sufficient, then it is certainly not wrong, but may not be right.

[Anonymous No.11089326]

>>11089317
>The Gospels are designed to contradict one another.
wut

[Anonymous No.11089328]

>>11089215
You gonna answer this? >>11089196

[Anonymous No.11089342]

>>11089196
>different genealogies of Jesus
>different number of Myrrhbearers
>only in the gospel of John it says that Jesus at the site of the crucifixion told John that from now on his mother was Mary. All other gospels say that the apostles were so afraid that none of them were present at the crucifixion.
>John instead of counting Bartholomew as one of the apostles mentions a Nathanael that is not mentioned anywhere in the other three and also omits the names of most other apostles.

This is what I can remember but I'm sure if you research you'll find lots more.

[Anonymous No.11089394]

>>11089215
>those suggestions
Must be retarded. Must be. Absolutely must be.

[Anonymous No.11089409]

You should've read Clement and the fragments of Valentinus instead of dimwitted psychikoi like Justin

[Anonymous No.11089413]

I think you're confusing modern scholarly works of history and science with a religious text, full of metaphors and intepretations, written over a thousand years before the scientific method.

[Anonymous No.11089414]

>>11089326
They are separate experiences that reflect individual interpretations of the same event, the life of jesus christ, which is constant, their interpretation of that event is not.

[Anonymous No.11089461]

>>11089342
Remember that the gospels were written 40-60 years after the crucifixion by four different men, who had different experiences.

[Anonymous No.11089483]

>>11089103
Do you take the bible literally or what ?
That is the wrong why to do it.
And naturally the eye witness accounts of the apostles will have a few contradictions.

[Anonymous No.11089492]

>>11089461
Then why did three of them fill theirs with copypasta?

[Anonymous No.11089495]

>>11089483
it was never meant to be taken non literally when it was written

[Anonymous No.11089519]

>>11089495
The poetic parts were never meant to be literal. Of course, the Gospels don’t fall into this category.

[Anonymous No.11089527]

>>11089342
On genealogy, they only contradict in so much as they claim to be tracing genealogy by the same method. There are several ways, with many conceivable motivations, for why each other, according to their own intentions in telling the story, charts a different course from Jesus to David. One could follow biologically down the father's line, while the other follows a legal path. Did one of them follow a levite marriages, while the other only counted biological fathers? Did one follow Mary's lineage, while the other followed Joseph's? How do you know which way to take it?

On Myrr--I'm not sure what "contradiction" you're referring to.

On the crucifixion, you've clearly read it wrong. John does not say that he was told Mary was his mother, but that Mary Magdalene was told Mary was her mother.

On the difference in names, first the omittance is of little importance and no contradiction. On the names that are different, if you'll note, many of the disciples are called by several names.

You can't simply read a work like the bible and expect it to be like your elementary school social studies book. It is perhaps the most complicated and interwoven story in known history. Next time you read, you should try reading an annotated bible. If you're really curious, you should start learning hebrew, latin, and ancient greek, to really get a sense of what's going on. Keep in mind as well, that the gospels are not simply the story of Jesus, but rather the story of Jesus as told by four different witnesses to his life. They are not speaking a historical truth, but rather four different phenomenological truths to four distinct audiences, all of which had different questions and concerns about the life of Jesus. People have been reading and telling these stories for 2000 years. It is foolish to think you are the first to notice these differences.

[Anonymous No.11089528]

>>11089495
Jesus speaks in parables all the time, do you take them literally too ?

[Anonymous No.11089539]

>>11089492
They didn't, but in large part because the synoptic gospels were preached to different groups of Jews, whereas John was brought largely to non-Jews.

[Anonymous No.11089542]

read it in greek, friend

[Anonymous No.11089568]

>>11089215
>you can’t have knowledge something isn’t wrong if you also can’t know if it is right. the possibility of the negative is assured by the lack of evidence for the positive
Christianity takes on subjects human beings simply have no way of knowing for sure. why do people apply basic logic to metaphysical subjects?
Do you use maths equations to express your feelings also?

[Anonymous No.11089579]

>>11089324
Its neither necessary or sufficient, no aspect of the bible narrative is plausibly true, no premise predicated on any part of it has truth. the antecedent and consequence are both by default false. god cannot exist as described in the bible and the bible blatantly lies about nature and history. fuck off back to theology
>>11089328
No because i never said anything like that, though they do contradict each other regarding the instructions for the church and the nature or the disciples recruitment by Christ
>>11089394
If i say physicalist verificiationism you’ll lose your minds and start pontificating about nihilism. i offer sensible alternatives to an insane notion, you people won’t even entertain the aforementioned
>>11089317
my intent is to undermine the epistemological validity of an institute backed up by lying, ostracism and threats of violence. I also vehemently oppose slavish thinking and the State, so naturally Christians are an enemy.
>its a work of literature
no its a theological narrative, its mean to be read as a history of the world and book of divine revelation
>did you gain anything from reading the OT
yes, Jews are insane narcissists and Daniel is a fine work of prose if taken out of context.
>NT
peasants like being told that home and hearth is the entirety of being and again Jews are insane narcissists
>did you go in with an open mind
do you when listening to evo bio people speaking or when looking at materialist cosmology? doubtful. and no of course not i wince every time i read Genesis
>says something psychotic in response to rhetoric
>our accounts of christ are inconsistent despite all of us allegedly knowing each other personally
you people are pathetic mewling children. would be so embarassing to have to tell adults i am a christian

[Anonymous No.11089584]

>>11089527
>John does not say that he was told Mary was his mother, but that Mary Magdalene was told Mary was her mother.
lol what

[Anonymous No.11089585]

>>11089528
the majority of texts in the Bible state beforehand whether the content is literal or not

[Anonymous No.11089592]

>>11089414
That's doesn't mean they are designed to be that way lol

[Anonymous No.11089594]

>>11089215
>you can’t have knowledge something isn’t wrong if you also can’t know if it is right. the possibility of the negative is assured by the lack of evidence for the positive

[Anonymous No.11089600]

>>11089568
No but i don’t assume my feelings are fundamental truths
>why do people apply logic to a field founded in logic by Aristotle and Plato
i wonder why

[Anonymous No.11089603]

>>11089103
>Is Christianity, dare I say it, wrong?
That is not even a debate Christianity is simply right.

[Anonymous No.11089605]

>>11089594
No im right in this instance, there are instances where that doesn’t hold but in the case of a totally baseless claim with no evidence whatsoever which has proven false historically i am correct. you can’t know something absolutely isn’t false but have no evidence that its true. that’s absurd.

[Anonymous No.11089617]

>>11089527
>Did one follow Mary's lineage, while the other followed Joseph's? How do you know which way to take it?
By reading the text maybe, both lineages trace his parentage through Joseph. The issue is also that, up to king David, the genealogies disagree on every single name. Did every single one of Jesus' ancestors between Joseph and David have a levirate marriage?

>You can't simply read a work like the bible and expect it to be like your elementary school social studies book
Yes, the fact that it's worse than a textbook speaks volumes

>but rather the story of Jesus as told by four different witnesses to his life
Luke and Matthew used Mark as a textual source, and there is no evidence Mark and John are eyewitnesses.

>They are not speaking a historical truth
On that we can agree

[Anonymous No.11089620]

>>11089605
only a child would present this number of assumptions in a discussion
How are we supposed to take you seriously?

[Anonymous No.11089627]

>>11089617

[Anonymous No.11089632]

>>11089617
>Yes, the fact that it's worse than a textbook speaks volumes
man the cringe is real

[Anonymous No.11089636]

>>11089620
You shouldn't.

[Anonymous No.11089653]

>>11089627
That didn't warrant a fedora.

[Anonymous No.11089655]

>>11089620
They’re all founded assumptions, the Bible’s prophecies have almost never proven true and there’s no evidence for neary all of its claims. We’ve not a single hint of a Christian god in our world outside of humans calling themselves christians inconsistently and everything in the book defies all reason and flies in the face of the natural order. Again: you cannot KNOW for certain the negative is not the case while also having no evidence and surety of the positive. That’s fucking insane. Im not making a case for hard atheism im showing you that your faith in the negative being untenable is totally baseless and you don’t have knowledge that its the case that ~(~A)

that is all i was saying from the first

[Anonymous No.11089664]

>>11089617
>Yes, the fact that it's worse than a textbook speaks volumes
dude its 2000 years old

[Anonymous No.11089676]

>>11089627
>>11089632
ebin

[Anonymous No.11089677]

>>11089655
>everything in the book defies all reason and flies in the face of the natural order
hahahahahahahahahaha

what do you think about books like Judges and Samuel?
also, have you read Proverbs or Psalms?

[Anonymous No.11089685]

>>11089655
There is lots of evidence of God you just chose to ignore.

[Anonymous No.11089691]

>>11089685
He’s talking the Christian God specifically.

[Anonymous No.11089701]

>>11089685
the prime mover has nothing to do with christianity

[Anonymous No.11089718]

Where do I find a cute Christian gf who knows she exists to worship the Lord and have my babies? Don't tell me to go to church because I'm not a Christian.

[Anonymous No.11089731]

>>11089103
Poor bait even by fedora standards.

[Anonymous No.11089733]

>>11089677
>Judges
Samson having magical strength from long hair and killing 1000 men with a donkey's jawbone sure makes me convinced this stuff is real

>Samuel
Excellent piece of historical fiction. It also features God sending an evil spirit into Saul he'll try and kill David. Figure that one out.

>Proverbs
Aphorisms which any ancient writers could come up with. Telling people to be charitable and beat their children doesn't require God.

>Psalms
I mean, there's 150 (151 for Orthodox), how do you want me to sum them all up? Some are beautiful, some are vindictive and violent. They're all over the place.

[Anonymous No.11089744]

The best way to find God is true Neo-Platonism and the ways of the mistic.
Just fast pray and meditate in a cave and you will find God

[Anonymous No.11089746]

>>11089733
Are you a nihilist by any chance? also, how old are you?

[Anonymous No.11089774]

>>11089746
We're on a taiwanese basket weaving forum, you can reply to what I said without knowing anything about me.

What's your age? Are you a Christian? What denomination? What's soteriology to you hold to? That's all irrelevant here.

[Anonymous No.11089783]

>>11089691
Check out orthodox Easter my man

[Anonymous No.11089788]

>>11089676
>.jpeg.png

[Anonymous No.11089799]

>>11089774
Monotheism is wrong about Jesus desu

[Anonymous No.11089811]

>>11089733
>telling people to be charitable and beat their children doesn't require God
Yes. you're right, Europe is fine.

[Anonymous No.11089827]

>>11089774
You know you're cucked when you still call them denominations, as though the name is the most meaningful difference between them.

[Anonymous No.11089828]

>>11089733
>Samson having magical strength from long hair and killing 1000 men with a donkey's jawbone sure makes me convinced this stuff is real
I mean, if that didn't happen then how do you think God should be presented in the Bible? In which way should the story have gone for you to have believed that a God was involved?

[Anonymous No.11089830]

>>11089811
Just shut the fuck up, you half-illiterate imbecile. You're not presenting anything remotely close to a coherent counterargument to that anon, so sit the fuck down and wait for someone smarter to come in before you do any more damage to the reputation of your own religion

[Anonymous No.11089836]

How is morality explained without God, I'm serious btw

[Anonymous No.11089839]

>>11089836
Kant does an ok job at justifying morality, but not not in way that would actually motivate anyone to modify their own behavior.

[Anonymous No.11089845]

>>11089836
Some kind of natural law of morality that doesn't have an intelligent principle behind it. But that's coming close to pantheism I guess.

[Anonymous No.11089849]

>>11089677
disgusting retard
>>11089685
there are plausible, but logically incoherent accounts of other types of dieties, the Christian God as autistically presented in the Bible is absolutely false and there is no doubt that you can’t be even vaguely confident its real. My whole contention is that you can’t be certain the negative is false because you have nothing to stand on saying its true. I hope that’s obvious to you. ~(~A) should imply A but since A is just as implausible as it is impossible yo prove ~A, you can’t know ~(~A) so the original post i replied to is lying or someone who does not underatand logic and should not be posting about metaphysics.

Im not an atheist either i just hate theism more than i do atheism

[Anonymous No.11089856]

>>11089828
>I mean, if that didn't happen then how do you think God should be presented in the Bible?
Probably not as a being which patronises people due to performing arbitrary rituals like the nazritie vows or helps them slaughter neighbours in petty clan warfare.

[Anonymous No.11089863]

>>11089856
Go on...

[Anonymous No.11089869]

>>11089849
you take yourself too seriously. That's why you'll never understand shit

[Anonymous No.11089875]

>>11089863
With what? I explained it. Samson has special favour from God due to not cutting his hair and not drinking wine, he fights Philistines for petty personal reasons, he's not even defending Israel like the other judges.

[Anonymous No.11089888]

>>11089849
>Thinking the bible is Autistic, because your read it like an autist

Lol, dude, it spells it out for you right in the beginning!! Follow the tree of knowledge and you will die. Follow the tree of life, and you will live in paradise. If you keep reading books for some secret order of the universe, you will die alone and miserable, no closer to the truth than when you started. If you simply try to live and do good, your life will be long and bright. Stop hearing, start listening.

[Anonymous No.11089897]

>>11089830
>europe abandons god
>two generations later, europe abandons society
everything is fine. don't listen to what you hear, because everything is just fine.

[Anonymous No.11089909]

>>11089869
oof i wouldn’t want to rely on insincerity for my metaphysics anon, ontology and cosmology are unbelievably important, grave matters to carry within our breasts like searing wounds that can only be healed with intense craving for wisdom. Im sorry you think sociopathic trolling or alrernatively, more pathetically, were brainwashed by adults as a child into thinking a Greco-Judaic book of tales is a proper cosmology and ontology.
>>11089888
this is a parody

[Anonymous No.11090002]

>>11089875
It gets easier when you realise Biblical stories are character studies as well as historical accounts. I wanted you to go on with how you think the Bible should've presented God because your comment >>11089856 is literally dripping with ignorance on the role of God in the Bible, his character and his philosophy. You don't understand the Bible at all yet here you are

[Anonymous No.11090007]

>>11089579
Ah a vehement atheist reading a religious text simply to undermine it!
>my intent is to undermine
But you should know by now how foolish a goal would be, dont you? What institution isnt backed by lying, ostracism and threats of violence? Governments, business? You? You seem quite hostile.
>Meant to be read a certain way
I assure you that it is indeed a work of literature. Meant, by whom? You? They? I read for myself and read it as a piece of literature, and one of the pillars of modern day English literature.
>Fine work of prose and jews are narcissists
Agreed on the first point, and duh on the second. They believe themselves to be THE chosen people, which is quite the conceit, one which Jesus attempted to undermine by stating we are all children of god, and the very reason he was persecuted by the jews.
>Open mind
Yes, I did. I'm not religious. That is, I do not adhere to any one religion and believe all religious institutions to be innately blasphemous idol worshiping. But I've read many works from the Qu'ran to excerpts of Mein Kampf, to john waters autobiography. I approach everything with an open mind, or at least this is my intent in terms of literature.
>name calling
You lose right there. Your intent is clearly malicious, you are being controlled by a Daemon in the jungian sense. You don't posses your ideas but they possess you. You did not make this thread to discover if your thesis was or wasnt correct. You went in utterly ignorant and assuming you were completely correct before you heard a single piece of criticism. You're opinions are valid, but as soon as you let your bitterness and hatred show through you've aready shown you are not in it to arrive at the truth, rather like a tyrant you want to impose your truth on others, as ignorantly as the Christians you so adamantly despise. You are a hypocrite, which means you must do some more self exploration.

[Guy whose life is all-age frie(...) No.11090021]

>>11090007
+1
Holy seven heavens

[Anonymous No.11090039]

>>11089579
I would really love to see your argument why the God of the bible cannot exist. Many before you have tried. Maybe this is the year.

[Anonymous No.11090044]

>>11090002
Yes, some excellent works of fiction are character studies. Samson is unctrolled and something of a wild man archetype but is still a servant of God, who utilises flawed people. He's betrayed by his wife Delilah to the Philistines, who remove the source of his favour with God, his hair, and totally debase him as a person. Samson's act of self-sacrifice is both heroic and has a message about the power of God, that he's the one who grants people strength, achieved through submitting oneself to him.

That doesn't make it any more conformable to the transcendent God who is Being itself. It's a violent legend about clan warfare and fidelity to the patron god. It's got great human signifcance because it's written by humans.

[Anonymous No.11090052]

>>11090039
Because he's a big meanie pants, apparently.

Anything that makes these pussies lives a little uncomfortable makes them shit their pants in fear and say no loving God could do it, whereas the God in the Bible, the one who created Jesus and Moses and Mohammad, this one has killed people and towns in the past for not understanding his reality before.

[Anonymous No.11090078]

>>11089103
Of course the Old Testament god is schizo. Yahweh is an amalgamation of very different characters at different times, like Enlil and Enki for the flood.

[Anonymous No.11090131]

>>11090039
Why would he exist?
Why wouldnt Jupiter exist?

[Anonymous No.11090152]

>>11090131
Oh, no, you poor thing. I thought you'd at least do better than that.

[Anonymous No.11090183]

>>11089897
I'm on your side, retard. You just don't have the capacity to argue your own point.

[Anonymous No.11090184]

>>11090152
Whatever. Keep believing in your jewgod.

[Anonymous No.11090210]

>>11090184
My God! I have been lanced by the spear of truth! My eyes now burn with a punishing fire! I have been found out, and all the scales have fallen. How could I have been deceived? This day of all my days shall forever be remembered. Up is down. Black is white. The heavens have met the ground! All light has been swallowed up by the black sun! This is the end of who I was, and the beginning of a new man, and over man, deity in my own right! How will I ever thank you, for in your wisdom, you have shown me the universe!

[Anonymous No.11090216]

>>11090152
Are you in here to intentionally parody horrible Christian arguments? The Christian God is far more plausible by virtue of being the source of natural law, by which all evil is a deviation from. The greco-roman pantheon is full of squabbling swan-fuckers.

[Anonymous No.11090316]

>>11090210

[Anonymous No.11090335]

>>11089483
>eye witness accounts of the apostles
None are eye witness accounts. They're all written by anonymous authors long after the supposed events.

[Anonymous No.11090352]

>>11090216
>Christian morality is good because it is more close to christian morality than non christian morality
Impressive

[Anonymous No.11090365]

>>11089605
No, you <60 IQ imbecile. If it's fundamentally impossible to make an argument that something is right because you have zero evidence that it is indeed right you force yourself into making the exact same principle argument for the opposite. If you have zero evidence something is right means you also have zero evidence that it is wrong also.

For example, so you can possibly understand. Let's say someone steals your cookies from your cookie jar. You have zero evidence, no cameras/fingerprints/knowledge of who was in the house, etc., you can not say your child did it. You are also not wrong if you declare your child took the cookies if you and your child were the only ones who were possibly in the house at that time and you know you didn't do it. Can you prosecute your child for stealing the cookies? No. You're just going to have to wait and see if they admit to it. And yes, it's entirely possible that they indeed did not do it.

How does this relate to Christianity?

Like it or not, Christianity is a syncretism of various religions and universal truths expressed in the middle eastern region of the time. Just because Christianity dressed it up in a different veneer, and added their own rules or interpretations, doesn't not mean that these fundamental and universal truths that are also woven in are completely wrong as a whole. In fact, due to it being a process of logical trial and error through this syncretism, it's more likely to be closer to the truth than the alternative.

Essentially, I have no way of proving my theory that my child took the cookies from the cookie jar. But, throughout all of time, other parents' children have done so. I've read and heard their stories, time and time again. While each tale is slightly different, they all, ultimately, had the same characteristics and reached nearly identical conclusions.

[Anonymous No.11090384]

>>11090216
>The source of natural law
>Gives people arbitrary commandments which he later revokes for a new system
Yahweh is clearly not the God of natural law. As a character he's changeable and has human foibles like anger and regret. He's a human creation, unlike the real God who's revealed in nature which is his true creation, not in imaginary war stories and laws like how to clean a house with mildew in it (which Yahweh apparently thought was a skin disease, see Leviticus 13 and 14, why would God reveal things that are plain wrong?).

[Anonymous No.11090456]

>implying Christ isn't risen

[Anonymous No.11090459]

>>11089103
Yes

[Anonymous No.11090461]

>>11090384
>As a character he's changeable and has human foibles like anger and regret.
All conceptions in relation to God are simulacrum for God transcends all conceptions. God is not actually angry or jealous in the way that humans are. What we see in the history of salvation is God condescending to human weaknesses, a lowering of Himself so that we might be raised to Him. Sometimes we have to give children analogies to explain something that they otherwise couldn't understand.

[Anonymous No.11090472]

>>11090456
Indeed He is risen!

[Anonymous No.11090502]

>>11090352
> Platonic and Aristotelian morality are Christian morality

[Anonymous No.11090530]

>>11089527
>It is foolish to think you are the first to notice these differences.
Where did he claim that?

[Anonymous No.11090562]

>>11089811
I'm confused. When people imply Europe is going to shit, they're usually talking about the God-believing Muslims.

[Anonymous No.11090570]

Nobody’s going to point out that OP straight up says that Maccabees doesn’t exist?

[Anonymous No.11090653]

>>11090039
because his description hinges on real physical events that purportedly happened which didn’t happen, and his behavior resembles a king’s or a priest’s and not a diety’s
>>11090052
>thinks they’re going to heaven
>doesn’t make any attempt to reevaluate values
>has no ideas about cosmology or ontology that deviate from Bible theory
>listens to priests instead of scientists or Reason
>arbitrarily exalts tyrannical religious fiends but denigrates people who’ve done significantly less
gay faggot posturing, could probably snap your neck in a fit of rage
>>11090152
that’s not me, the God of Christianity is less plausible than the deist god, spinoza’s god, the vedantic brahman, chinese dao or the great spirits of shamanic first nations’ religions. None of these are likely to be real, but they do not hinge upon historical narratives which don’t exist or psychotic behavior which appears to be priestcraft and superstitious tyrranizing of the public rather than real
>>11090210
he has a point its a god made up by Jews that greeks adopted and adapted to much more coherent notions of diety which Plato and Aristotle had already developed
>>11090216
Aristotle and Plato’s God is identified with the Good and provides grounding for natural law. Luckily we don’t need natural law at all because it has never done anything to remedy human Evil and is a source of deception
>>11090365
>if you have zero evidence that its correct you have zero evidence that its false
i don’t think it works both ways; in the instance of Deity sure you can’t prove its not real. But, my contention was that you can’t know its definitely not the negative. You can’t deny the negative absolutely which is what i was saying originally.

Im going to reemphasize that you’re incredibly vapid, and incapable of paying close attention to what i was critiquing.

You cannot know for certain the christian god and bible narrative is NOT false. You can’t deny the negative without having strong evidence that it must be the positive. There is no evidence of the positive, so you have no reason to deny the negative, nor do you necessarily need to accept the negative, though it is bizarre to assume the negative isn’t more likely in the total absence of evidence for the positive.

The long responses are a sign of weakness and calling me stupid while defending Christfaggotry is embarassing
>>11090461
You keep saying children, which implies two things: you fancy yourself a parental figure for non-believers which preemptively (and obviously) implies you’re not arguing in good faith. there is an assumption that God thinks humans are retarded animals that can’t reason for themselves and so saying things that are factually incorrect and very clearly stem from antiquated natural science explanations somehow constitutes benevolence. But, not only is telling children the wrong thing not allegoric didacticism but its a way of building mistrust and spite

[Anonymous No.11090692]

>>11089103
The Bible is some mystical stories/stuff with an esoteric meaning mixed with random history and tall tales. If you can separate the wheat from the chaff you can find great stuff. Of course you run into errors or ridiculousness trying to assume all of it is divinely sanctioned and infallible and literal. This is what makes me sad about the Bible, Christians take it completely literally, then people become anti-Christians because they think the only way to read it all is literally.

[Anonymous No.11090716]

>>11090365
Dude, are you fucking high or retarded or something? Things are true or false. If you know it’s not false, you’re saying it’s true.

[Anonymous No.11090742]

>>11090653
Do you not understand what faith is or why it is a key component and theme of revealed religions?

[Anonymous No.11090763]

>>11090716
There are no objective truths, nigga.

[Anonymous No.11090764]

>>11090742
do you not understand that >>11090716
plus what ive already said is all that ive been arguing and i have no interest in your faith at all, only your knowledge. And the original claim was “i know its definitely not false, i am not sure if it is true” and then the person or whoever has ignored this simple illogical statement they made for dozens of replies. This is my only point of contention. Faith does not matter to me just like it doesn’t matter to scientists or to philosophers or machinery.

I will tell you something anon, i have never once seriously had faith in anything or anyone. Not even motivated by skepticism of the rational kind, just my family, friends, country, race and religion have all failed me often enough to reflexively reject faith. Seems like a way of harming oneself

[Anonymous No.11090771]

>>11090763
then there is absolutely no validity to the Bible and its as meaningful as reading receipts from sex shops or casinos

[Anonymous No.11090788]

>>11090764
>Faith does not matter to me just like it doesn’t matter to scientists or to philosophers or machinery.
>I will tell you something anon, i have never once seriously had faith in anything or anyone.
Then you will fail to comprehend even the slightest element of the Christian religion; most religion for that matter. That is what it boils down to.
I am sorry for you.

[Anonymous No.11090799]

>>11089653
anything christfags disagree with warrants a fedora

[Anonymous No.11090811]

>>11090788
but all im concerned with is claims of knowledge which you have backed off from repeatedly. How can you not its definitely not the negative if you have no evidence or knowledge of the positive besides faith which is anti-knowledge? Ill answer for you: you couldn’t and you don’t

so, whoever made that original claim is lying or confused. faith has nothing to say about whether your knowledge of ~(~A) is true, because you also don’t know what it implies, which is A

[Anonymous No.11090847]

>>11090716
Wrong again, kiddo.

[Anonymous No.11090851]

>>11090763
that's just like, your opinion, man

[Anonymous No.11090865]

>>11090764
>baby's first existential crisis...

[Anonymous No.11091008]

>>11089215
>things that are compatible with history, science and philosophy
t. midwit. The whole point of spirituality is that it's a self consistent system of knowledge within a coherence truth framework that is orthogonal to materialist truth. If it was directly compatible you wouldn't be getting anything new out of it. INB4 but it's not self coherent: paradoxes are part of spiritual discourse although some are just fuck ups of course, but I wouldn't trust you to be able to pick them out.

[Anonymous No.11091018]

>>11090764
>can't figure out calculus
calculus don't be existin nigga

[Anonymous No.11091111]

>>11089909
Not him, explain how it's a parody, what's wrong with what he said

[Anonymous No.11091118]

>>11090865
You don't know what an existential crisis is.

[Anonymous No.11091159]

>>11091118
nice comeback faggot

[Anonymous No.11091180]

>>11091159
I'm not him, I'm just saying, if he's never had faith his behavior doesn't really fit the definition of an "existential crisis." He's definitely an edgelord, though.

[Anonymous No.11091242]

>>11089888
Trips
>>11090788
Dubs
>>11091111
Quads

Christian God confirmed

[Anonymous No.11091361]

>>11091242
How can atheists even compete?

[Anonymous No.11091493]

>>11091180
fair, but one doesn;t need faith to have an existential crisis...so it seems like you don;t know what an existential crisis is.

[Anonymous No.11092185]

>>11089527
I made the original comment.

On the genealogies indeed its pretty complicated and I don't have an answer. But from a historical point of view is kind of hard to believe a person born in such poor circumstances as Jesus would have a written down form of all 42 (according to Matthiew) or 77 (according to Luke) ancestors. From my knowledge as an archaeologist we only have this kind of detailed records for kings, aristocrats, statesmen. My personal view is that is entirely fictions to give legitimacy to Jesus and if I remember correctly to fulfill an OT prophesy that the Mesiah would be a descendant of David.

The Myrrbearers who went first to the tomb of Jesus and discovered that it was opened are given in different numbers and names. For example Matthew says they were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses and the mother of the sons of Zebedee (Matthew 27:55-56), Luke doesent even name them and just says women "γυναιkες " (Luke 23:55) while John names only Mary Magdalene (John 20:1).

On the crucifixion, this is literary what it says: ιησους ουν ιδων την μητερα kαι τον μαθητην παρεστωτα ον ηγαπα λεγει τη μητρι αυτου γυναι ιδου ο υιος σου ειτα λεγει τω μαθητη ιδου η μητηρ σου kαι απ εkεινης της ωρας ελαβεν αυτην ο μαθητης εις τα ιδια. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+19%3A26-27&version=NIV

Btw I'm a native Greek speaker and was brought up in the Orthodox tradition and if you just google icon of crucifixion you'll see Jesus on the cross and next to him his mother and John. But I don't know if they teach something different where you are. Because here this imagery and the story are very well known.

I think John contradicts the other three on the names, whether this is important to you or not it doesn't matter. The fact that the scribe of this later work decided to make changes shows that other fallacies can be there as well, in my opinion.

As I said I'm a native Greek speaker and i read the NT in its entirety in the original koine Greek form, also I'm an archaeologist studying the Eastern Mediterranean so I know a few things about the historical context as well. I dont know hebrew since I'm not interested in the OT and I there is really nothing in Latin from the apostolic era. I've read some church fathers in Greek like Gregory of Nazianzus, John of Damascus and John Chrysostom. But I'm not well versed in this later writings as much as the NT itself. I dont know if you know hebrew, latin and greek and how helpful it was for you to understand the texts better.

I completely agree with you that they dont convey a historical truth and they are different narrations by different people at different times, copying each other at times and omitting passages at others. This is why so many papyri of apocrypha date to the same period as the gospels

[Anonymous No.11092367]

>>11089103
>Read the Old Testament
>Is Christianity,
Pick one. New Covenant means what it says: supercessionism.

>>11089103
>the world should have ended already
Apocalypse is unveiling, disclosure, a turning point. The Kingdom of Heaven is in the heart, judgement comes daily.

[Anonymous No.11092531]

>>11090763
Then it’s not an objective truth that there are no objective truth, darkie.

[Anonymous No.11092538]

>>11092531
This sentence is false

[Anonymous No.11092554]

This memoplex hasn't aged well.

[Anonymous No.11092581]

>>11089836
pretty sipmle really https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOZzNOkcEgM

[Anonymous No.11092626]

>>11092538
That’s just some words with no meaning. The map is not the territory, representation is not what it represent. Whoa WOAAAAAAAHHHHH DUDE LIKE MY COBSCIOUSNESS IS SO ENGLITENED. Like MIND. = LIKE BLOWN

LIKE DUDE LIKE WHAT IF LIKE CHRISTIANITY ISNT STRICTLY TRUE OR FALSE EITHER LIKE ITS NOT FALSE I KNOW THAT FOR CERTAIN BUT LIKE ITS NOT NECESSARILY TRU EITHER BECAUSE IT TRANSCENDS THE TRUE FALSE DICHOTOMY ... LIKE LOOKED AT FROM A JUNGIAN OR GUENONIAN PERSPECTIVE ITS JUST TEACHING US DEEP TRUTHS ABOUT THE NATURE OF MANKIND AND REALITY BRO.

[Anonymous No.11092627]

>>11090653
>physical events that purportedly happened which didn’t happen,
but they did happen

[Anonymous No.11092634]

>>11092626
>The map is not the territory,
There is literally nothing outside of the text.
>Jungian or Guenian perspective
Please tell you were being sincerely ironic

[Anonymous No.11092648]

>>11090764
>just my family, friends, country, race and religion have all failed me often enough to reflexively reject faith
i can see why you dont belive I you are not to blame its understandable. But even numbers need faith to be real, people are still not sure what they are, even to the have practical effects in the world.

[Anonymous No.11093707]

>>11090716
>Things are true or false.
that is wrong. And right too.

[Anonymous No.11095257]

bump

[Anonymous No.11095553]

>>11090653
>thinks Gods work like in the comic books
Don't bug the bugman

[Anonymous No.11095555]

>>11090799
>aktually, the bible is worse than a schoolbook

[Anonymous No.11095560]

>>11091361
pro-tip: they've been dead the whole time.

[Anonymous No.11095567]

>>11092185
>as OP
>as an archeologist
>As a native speaker of ancient greek
>as an anonymous authority on the internet
no u.