[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 32 KB, 566x436, Untitled.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14189948 No.14189948 [Reply] [Original]

>> No.14189964

>>14189948
The most

>> No.14189971

>>14189964
I don't get it. Why does it always end up in top 100?

>> No.14189973

>>14189948
If you can read the new testament and books of solomon, and you aren't moved, you will never appreciate literature.

>> No.14189976

>>14189971
It's like Homer. If you read enough literature admiration for the bible will eventually be drummed into your head.

>> No.14189994

It's a pity it's all a mash-up of older Mediterranean and Middle Eastern religious tropes instead of an original story. "Saint Paul" really fucked up history.

>> No.14190006

>>14189994
Saint Paul is the actually based part.
Without him it would have been the ancestral text of a weird kike subgroup. Just look at the absolute state of rabbinic theology and philosophy. This is what would have happened without oh so big bad Paul.
Hating Paul is the surest sign of a brainlet or a heretic because he retroactively btfo all of them.

>> No.14190018

>>14190006
Read the Antichrist by Nietzsche.
Paul was a retard who didn't even understand the teachings.

Nietzsche is always seen as a huge critic of Christianity, but in reality he was pretty sympathetic to Jesus himself, all his criticisms were on the fact that Christians could only see the teachings of Jesus through the lens of St Paul

>> No.14190035

>>14190018
I was half expecting it.
Nietzsche is inventing a figure, just using the name christ, that has no basis. Because the only knowledge we have of him is from the apostles, that he rejects, allowing him to say absolutely anything. BTW Muhammad did the same to frame Jesus into his own vision.
Nietzsche is an all around retard, but the antechrist in particular is comically dated. It was the edgy baseless view of the time. Today there are other edgy views, but very distinct from nietzsche's.
>na mate I totally understand Jesus unlike those faggot apostles
Sure thing.
It also doesn't disqualify my other post that without apostles and especially Paul (and the other apostles had the same views, they quarreled around dec0bdary bullshit like mutilating baby dicks, and ended up agreeing with Paul) you not only wouldn't even know about Jesus but would only have the basis to go full talmudic.

>> No.14190052
File: 11 KB, 400x400, ENTP.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14190052

>Entp v Intp
>Right v Left
The left(Intp) always claiming they aren't charismatic and confident because they're "educating themselves and intelligent".

You literally can't refute this.

>> No.14190055

>>14190035
Okay retard.

Nietzsches biggest criticism of the difference between Jesus and Paul was;
That Jesus taught that "The Kingdom of Heaven" was something here and now, something that you had to bring forth from inside of you. Something akin to a childlike bliss, a state of pure innocence (The kingdom of heaven belongs to children)

But in the eyes of Paul and the disciples, the Kingdom of heaven was something that Jesus was going to bring during his second coming, and/or somewhere you go to after your death.
Which was a fabrication that needed to be implemented, because after Jesus "died", nobody knew what to do. The Messiah was supposed to bring the kingdom of heaven on earth, but nobody could see it...

So yes, ironically, Nietzsche actually understood the teachings of Jesus better than most Christians, and St Paul...

>> No.14190056

>>14190035
In addition, Jesus explicitly says to follow the apostles so disqualifying them is already going against his 'teachings' unless you want to go into extra crispy memetic territory, claiming all of this was added by the disciples later on in a grand conspiracy. But in that case why believe anything they say at all?

>> No.14190059

>>14190006
>the ugly jew who willingly killed and tortured Christians part of a long line of Jews who hated Christians is the based one

>> No.14190061

>>14190052
Where did the Jungian personality type posting come from all of a sudden?

>> No.14190066

>>14190052
And if you were INTJ you wouldn't have fucked up creating a thread, retard.

>> No.14190068

>>14190056
Ironically, St Paul opposed the teachings of the ACTUAL disciples of jesus (Peter/James), but Christians dont have a problem with it

>> No.14190073

>>14190061
I dunno but it's funny. Most don't actually take it seriously anon, it's just useful for identification(and so memeing) because the typing's remain effectually true, a lot of the reasoning for it is bullshit but as I said.

Jung's original typology was better but even that still suffered from similar problems.

>> No.14190084

>>14190068
They met and agreed on everything. Is church history banned along with Paul in nietzsche an studies?
You can also just re-read the acts of the apostles, and see what Peter actually thought.
You will not find any of that pseudo-gnostic madness of muh kangdom being a state of mind, especially in this world.

>> No.14190100

>>14190055
Did mustache man stop reading after the sermon of the mount?
Because that's the only single passage that can, with some heavy bad faith and refusal to recognize earlier Jewish writings, be fitted into this interpretation.

>> No.14190106

>>14190084
ok RETARD.

As much as I would love to, I dont even need to quote the Gospel of Thomas to prove my point.

(Luke 17:21, KJV)
"Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you."

How can you still seriously think, that Jesus is going to "Bring" the Kingdom of God, when he said it is already here, within you?


>They met and agreed on everything
I don't consider the canonical books to be a 100% legitimate source of information anyway. But there is clear in the letter to the Galatians that there is a lot of disagreement between St Paul and James the Just. And many early Jewish Christian sects rejected the teachings of St Paul (such as the Ebionites and the Nazarenes, who were also led by James the Just)

Don't say things like "Muh Heretics", "Muh Church Canon" because things that "Christians" established 300 years after the death of Jesus mean nothing to me.
>>14190100
No, his argument is that the Gospels we have were written by people who didn't know what "The Kingdom of heaven within" really meant, so they came up with the idea that jesus was going to bring it again during his second coming, since the Jewish Messiah, was supposed to, according to Jewish texts, bring the Kingdom of Heaven on earth during his FIRST coming.
And this by the way, is one of the main arguments Jews make against Jesus being the Messiah

>> No.14190109

>>14190018
embarrassing

>> No.14190111

>>14190109
Christians are, yes

>> No.14190123

>>14190106
We're going deeper, using texts that even the very first generation of christians considered illigetimate, while claiming the texts actually written by the verified disciples are doubtful.
If you want to use the ebin single quote, ith out understanding, why not 'my kingdom is not of this world'? The kangdom is indeed within us, as in our spirit, something which all new testament text declares.

>> No.14190128

>open Word
>delete the New Testament
ah, perfect

>> No.14190138

>>14190128
watcha doin rabbi

>> No.14190148

>>14190123
>First generations of Christians considered illegitimate

Bruh, there were so many different types of Christians using different texts. The only texts you consider legitimate are the ones the Church told you were legitimate.
Even though scholars and historians say that the Gospel of Thomas (Atleast most of it) can be traced back to the original disciples of Jesus.

Also, Jesus and the early Christians considered the Book of Enoch and the Psalms of Solomon to be canonical, they even quote from them in the New Testament. Yet the church leaves them out of the Canon?

>The kangdom is indeed within us
Then why do you think that there is going to be a 'second coming of jesus' where he literally brings the Kingdom of heaven to earth, which he was supposed to do the first time?

What even is "The Kingdom of Heaven" according to Christians?

>> No.14190158

>>14190148
>Also, Jesus and the early Christians considered the Book of Enoch and the Psalms of Solomon to be canonical, they even quote from them in the New Testament. Yet the church leaves them out of the Canon?
So? the Bible references and quotes several non-Christian texts.

>> No.14190186

>BCE
*tips*

>> No.14190779

>>14190052
ENTP vs INTP is literally Nick Fuentes vs Destiny

>> No.14190833

>>14189973
I've never read the Bible, but I want to since I started an internship at a church. Which version do I read?

>> No.14192273

>>14189973
>books of solomon
Say the Wisdom Books instead, it carries a fuller set and none of them were actually written by Solomon