/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19448995]

Why is it called "_Christ_ianity" when Paul is more important to the religion than Jesus?

[Anonymous No.19449047]

>>19448995
Makes you wonder why Jesus didn’t explicitly state that he was going to die for our sins and that if we believe this, we will go to heaven. If you just read the Gospels, Jesus just seems like an enlightened being who realized his higher Self and wanted others to do the same.

[Anonymous No.19449089]

Paulianity didn’t have the same ring to it

[Anonymous No.19449123]

>>19449047
>he missed the well message
>and the thief going to Heaven
>and the if you'd known me you'd have known my father vice versa
>and the forgive them they know not what they do
>and the Roman remarking surely he was the son of God
>and the resurrection
Maybe you need to go back and re read

[Anonymous No.19449182]

>>19448995
That's the least of its problems. Imagine telling your cultists that BIG STUFF is happening SOON, but then you die. Then people go around saying "well don't worry guys, BIG STUFF is still happening SOON". In fact, the arguably second biggest guy in the book says that he's probably not even going to die by the time the BIG STUFF is happening, because you know what? It's coming, SOON. It's been a few decades but the original guy said that some people listening to his speech are going to still be alive when the BIG STUFF is going to happen. And by this time, people are getting on the older side, so 20 years tops and we're going to see the BIG STUFF happening, come on!.
Then 2000 years later they're still here.
I mean, there are other equally gigantic problems like starting your own religion from another religion, borrowing their concepts and prophecies and then deciding that the BIG GUY at the center of your religion is someone who doesn't fullfill several prophecies, not even in a roundabout way.

[Anonymous No.19449219]

>>19449182
Why do christniggers believe the antichrist is a person instead of a giant sea monster like revelations says?

[Anonymous No.19449220]

>>19449047
Jesus didn't write the gospels.

[Anonymous No.19449689]

>>19448995
>Paul is more important to the religion than Jesus
"What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? They are servants through whom you believed, as the Lord has assigned to each his role. I planted the seed and Apollos watered it, but God made it grow. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow. He who plants and he who waters are one in purpose, and each will be rewarded according to his own labor. For we are God’s fellow workers; you are God’s field, God’s building.

By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as an expert builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one must be careful how he builds. For no one can lay a foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ." (1 Cor. 3:5-11)

>>19449047
>Makes you wonder why Jesus didn’t explicitly state that he was going to die for our sins and that if we believe this, we will go to heaven
"Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life.

For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that everyone who believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him. Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe has already been condemned, because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son." (John 3:14-18)

>>19449219
>Why do christniggers believe the antichrist is a person instead of a giant sea monster
"Children, it is the last hour; and just as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. This is how we know it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they did not belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But their departure made it clear that none of them belonged to us.

You, however, have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth. I have not written to you because you lack knowledge of the truth, but because you have it, and because no lie comes from the truth. Who is the liar, if it is not the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father, but whoever confesses the Son has the Father as well." (1 John 2:18-23)

Happy to answer any more questions. Peace and love to you all in the name of the Lord of the universe, Jesus Christ.

[Anonymous No.19449861]

>>19449689
When is He coming back? I am so tired.

[Anonymous No.19449879]

>>19449047
Because that’s boring as fuck. God loves art. This is why you will never be a writer

[Anonymous No.19449889]

>>19449861
"And when the Lamb opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the testimony they had upheld. And they cried out in a loud voice, “How long, O Lord, holy and true, until You avenge our blood and judge those who dwell upon the earth?”

Then each of them was given a white robe and told to rest a little while longer, until the full number of their fellow servants, their brothers, were killed, just as they had been killed." (Revelation 6:9-11)

Stay strong, brother. "No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; He will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, He will also provide an escape, so that you can stand up under it."

[Anonymous No.19449903]

>>19449689
paul's epistles are more important to the christian religion than Christ's own words. so why is it called christianity?

[Anonymous No.19449927]

>>19449689
>"Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life.
That’s obviously a reference to Kundalini, so analogy is de facto esoteric.
> John 3:14-18
not said by Jesus himself
>>19449123
I don’t see any of your points here. You can be a son of God, abide in the Father, etc. and not be the ONLY being that can do so. Where did Jesus put himself above everyone else? He did not claim uniqueness. On the contrary, he said that we would do greater things than he. This is how Jesus is a man and still the Son of God. When he says “no one is good but the Father” and “it is the Father that works within me” it should be clear that Jesus is just a man like you and me.

[Anonymous No.19449929]

>>19449903
Paul's epistles are not more important to the Christian religion than Christ's own words. The Gospels play the most central and highest role in all of Christianity. Your claim is based solely on your animosity towards Christianity, and not any knowledge of the religion itself. If you ever attended an apostolic Christian liturgy and saw the central and prime role of the Gospel reading, you would know exactly why your opinion is sorely mistaken.

[Anonymous No.19449937]

>>19449927
>That’s obviously a reference to Kundalini, so analogy is de facto esoteric.
You are anachronistically applying an interpretation that is completely outside of the context of the Hebrew culture they were raised in. It is far more likely that it is a reference to Moses' brazen serpent being lifted up on a stick, as a parallel to the crucifixion.
>not said by Jesus himself
It literally is said by Jesus Himself. Read the chapter before criticizing things you don't fully understand.

[Anonymous No.19449947]

>>19449927
>You can be a son of God, abide in the Father, etc. and not be the ONLY being that can do so.
This is why you should be careful to criticize things without reading them. "Only-begotten" is key here - we are all sons of God, but Jesus Christ (the Logos of God) is THE only-begotten (monogenous) Son of God, as He said Himself. https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/3-18.htm

[Anonymous No.19449955]

>>19449929
they read the gospel RIGHT AFTER reading from the epistle. often times the priest will pontificate about the epistle instead of the gospel. one of my local priests always stresses paul. you would think it's paul's religion, listening to him. or at least that Jesus and paul are of equal importance.

[Anonymous No.19449970]

>>19449955
Again, like I said, the Gospel plays the central and prime role in the entire liturgy. Only the priest or deacon is allowed to read the Gospel book (and the deacon only after being blessed by the priest), it is carried out with reverence and held above for all to see (even more obvious in the Eastern liturgies), and I don't actually believe you could believe that after all of this, you really believe the epistle readings hold a position of more primacy. Just because your priest doesn't give amazing homilies on the Gospel, does not mean it does not play the central role in the entire liturgy.

[Anonymous No.19449991]

>>19449937
>>19449947
It is not clear that Jesus said this himself. Many red letter Bibles drop the red letters starting with these verses

[Anonymous No.19449994]

>>19449970
what happens at the ceremony does not actually matter to the point i'm making. you have to think in terms of actual effect and the effect of paul on the catholic church's history and positions is greater than Jesus'. without paul, the church would be unrecognizable. seems like outsized influence to me. there were early christians that said the same thing and were executed. why?

[Anonymous No.19450053]

>>19449991
The vast majority of all Biblical scholars, and Biblical translations, attribute these words to Jesus. In fact, the conversation to Nicodemus would make absolutely no sense if they were not His words. You are forcing the text to have an incoherent reading, because you don't want the text to say what it says. Why be afraid? Let Jesus speak.

>>19449994
>what happens at the ceremony does not actually matter to the point i'm making
It does very much, because you are implying that the epistles are more important to Christianity than Christ's own words, when the very summation of the Christian faith itself, the liturgy, soundly disproves that accusation. Regardless, it is clear that Paul's writings were treated with much respect, because like the other leaders of the Church (Peter, John, etc.), he was filled with the Holy Spirit. Peter says so himself when he writes: "Consider also that our Lord’s patience brings salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom God gave him. He writes this way in all his letters, speaking in them about such matters. Some parts of his letters are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.
Therefore, beloved, since you already know these things, be on your guard so that you will not be carried away by the error of the lawless and fall from your secure standing." (2 Peter 3:15-16)
It is clear that the early Church leaders recognized that Paul's letters were "among the scriptures", but Paul himself writes that the resurrection, contained within the gospels, is the sole and prime basis of the Christian religion, and that without it, everything else is pointless:
"And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is worthless, and so is your faith."
The only way one could hold this jaded view of yours is if they refuse to look at the entire context and contents of the New Testament. I kindly request that you do your due dilligence in this topic, and not just make silly statements like Paul being more, or equally, important than the narrative of Jesus Christ's life, death, and resurrection contained within the Gospels.
>there were early christians that said the same thing and were executed. why?
The Ebionites and Nazarenes were excommunicated because they refused to follow the hierarchy instituted by Jesus Christ Himself. Thus, just as John said about the proto-Gnostics, "they went out from us, but they did not belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But their departure made it clear that none of them belonged to us.".

[Anonymous No.19450073]

>>19449047
fpbp

[Anonymous No.19450124]

>>19450053
>The vast majority of all Biblical scholars, and Biblical translations, attribute these words to Jesus
source: your ass
> absolutely no sense if they were not His words. You are forcing the text to have an incoherent reading,
How does it not make sense? Some Biblical scholars say John starts talking at verse 13. I always intuitively felt that John was the one who said these verses. It’s not in Jesus’ style

[Anonymous No.19450155]

>>19450124
Literally just take a single look at a parallel comparison of all Bible translations on those verses, and educate yourself, friend.
https://biblehub.com/bsb/john/3.htm
Click parallel, and see where most translations place the quotation marks for when Christ is speaking. Your extreme minority position is clearly only being chosen because you don't want Christ to have claimed Himself to be the only-begotten Son of God, when this is an accepted tenet of every single branch of ancient Christianity. It's pretty telling.

[Anonymous No.19450182]

>>19449182
early Christians were literally /pol/
>trust me guys, just two more weeks until lapalmatsunamitrumpreinstatememtmassvaxtinction

[Anonymous No.19450219]

>>19450155
>click on the first version, NIV
>red letters stop after verse 15
I think it should be obvious that Jesus did not say these words. Jesus has his own distinct voice, and it does not come across in these verses. The switch from first person to third person only supports this.

[Anonymous No.19450244]

>>19450219
>click on the first version, NIV
It's no surprise that the modernist Non-Inspired Version would take the most liberal position - and your opinion on speaking in the third-person being not in His "distinct voice" completely ignores that Jesus speaks in the third person incredibly frequently in the synoptics, as well as in John. The fact remains that the vast majority of translations interpret the quotation as continuing all the way to verse 21, and the main reason you disregard it is because you need Jesus to not be the only-begotten Son of God for your theosophic gnostic fan-fiction to be true - and so it is a post-hoc hypothesis based on preconceived biases, not an honest assessment of the evidence at hand. You can feel free to be at odds with the majority of scholars, but as for me, I will take the interpretation which is not only accepted by most translators and interpreters, but is also consistent with the unanimous interpretation of the early Church Fathers, who were filled with the Holy Spirit.

[Anonymous No.19450323]

>>19450244
I always interpreted these verses as being said by John, and just a few years ago, I was reading the KJV as a standard Christian. So your claim that I’m trying to fit the verses to my belief is wrong. But you can say that my lifelong interpretation was flawed, I don’t care. I’ll continue to believe that Jesus was an enlightened being and that the Bible is not inerrant, and that the other writers possibly held misconceptions about Jesus’ teachings, or that at least most Christians completely misinterpret everything. Jesus said that the kingdom of heaven is not a location, that it is within us, but that doesn’t stop 99% of Christians from believing that we will literally go to a place after we die. Jesus never used the word hell, but Sheol and Gehenna, which have completely different connotations, especially to ancient Jews, who did not believe in hell. Then you have divisions between denominations because the verses are not so explicit.Christianity is filled with confusion and misinterpretation because it is not as divinely inspired as claimed.

[Anonymous No.19450370]

>>19450323
> I’ll continue to believe that Jesus was an enlightened being and that the Bible is not inerrant, and that the other writers possibly held misconceptions about Jesus’ teachings, or that at least most Christians completely misinterpret everything
You can only hold this position by disregarding what the Gospels clearly teach, and throwing out whichever verses don't agree with your preconceived notions. John clearly records that Jesus sends the Holy Spirit to the apostles to guide them into all truth - for you to claim that the apostles then were led into falsehoods and incorrect lies, is a form of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. If you die believing that despite Jesus' clear teaching that the Holy Spirit guides the apostles into all truth, they were still led to believe falsehoods and lies, you will face the eternal consequences of believing Jesus and the Holy Spirit to be liars. What will your defense be at your particular judgment, then?

There is a reason why every single ancient apostolic Christian denomination is in agreement about what 99.9% of verses mean, and agree on almost every single major point of doctrine. The only major denominational divisions on interpretations are between Protestants and other Protestants, all of whom arose 1500 years after Jesus Christ created His Church on the rock of St. Peter (Matt. 16:18) - the same Church which He promised the gates of Hell would never prevail against.

Please, be careful when leaning on your own understanding. Do you want to risk your eternal salvation by believing that Jesus Christ is a liar, and that the Holy Spirit did not guide the apostles into all truth, and that the Church fell into error almost as soon as Jesus created it? Is that a smart bet to take? What is the cost/benefit analysis of such a belief, compared to adhering to the ascetical/mystical tradition of the apostolic churches?

I bear no ill-will towards you, friend. I just ask that you please think deeply about your decision, and that on such an important matter, you ask God to show you the truth, with the honest and humble submission that you will follow wherever He wants you to lead, even if it is not where you want to go. I believed in the gnostic-perennialist-theosophic system too, but when I opened myself up to God and let go of my attachments and biases, and let Him lead me where He wanted me to go, I found that it was all false. I hope you do the same. God be with you.

[Anonymous No.19450373]

The more you look back in history the more you realize that the abrahamic faith was never to benefit Humanity but to destroy it.

if you think about all the Death and All the rape that happened, you would understand that Hitler was only doing God's will.
it says plainly and clearly Thou shalt not kill however in order to live you have to kill beings for your survival and then instructs people to go to war and then kill other people's children and daughters?

omnipotent? one without sin? I didn't stop believing in God because I thought it was a fairytale I stopped believing in God when I realized that God was not a person I would ever look up to as a role model.
the fact that got approved of slavery tells you all you need to know.

if God truly is a creator of the universe, and he had instructions laid out for his children he or she would have put them in a digestible format for all of his children on Earth not just for the petty few.

the fact that this God loves you so much he's willing to send you to hell if you've never heard about him tells you all you need to know.

I don't understand the part about a jealous God if he is the only God who is he jealous of himself?

I would still have a family today if it wasn't for that pesky bastard. putting my faith in God was the worst decision I've ever made in my life.

the best part is as a human being I don't need to be worship or even think to do good in this world I naturally want to be that way and I don't need to be threatened in order to do it or be tempted with eternal life as payment.

[Anonymous No.19450392]

>>19450373
>if you think about all the Death and All the rape that happened, you would understand that Hitler was only doing God's will.
The Rabbinic Jewish religion (synagogue of Satan) and Christianity are mutually irreconcilable opposites.
>it says plainly and clearly Thou shalt not kill however in order to live you have to kill beings for your survival
The literal translation is "thou shalt not murder", not "thou shalt not kill".
>the fact that got approved of slavery tells you all you need to know.
Slavery was basically a form of bankruptcy insurance where one and one's family could still survive by working for a wealthier family, rather than starving to death. Plus, the Jubilee was a thing.
>if God truly is a creator of the universe, and he had instructions laid out for his children he or she would have put them in a digestible format for all of his children on Earth not just for the petty few.
He did - that is why Christianity is the world's biggest religion, with followers in every nation.
>the fact that this God loves you so much he's willing to send you to hell if you've never heard about him tells you all you need to know.
Only Protestants (who follow man-made traditions) believe that. The ancient churches do not believe that every person who has never heard of Jesus Christ goes to Hell. Look up "invincible ignorance", and the "natural law carved into the heart".
>I don't understand the part about a jealous God if he is the only God who is he jealous of himself?
It is because the covenant with Israel is akin to a marriage - and the Israelites would constantly cheat on God with other false gods and idols. That is why they are called harlots. Read Hosea, it is very short.
>I would still have a family today if it wasn't for that pesky bastard.
If you think believing in God is supposed to make your life easy and without struggle, you have no understanding of the scriptures. God's love is like a Father - He wants to help us grow and perfect our souls, so that we can become better people, helping the world through becoming saints, and eventually spending eternity in heaven with Him.

[Anonymous No.19450428]

>>19450373
2011 Richard Dawkins called, he wants his arguments back. Also nice job making presumably objective moral judgements while being an atheist.

[Anonymous No.19450534]

>>19450370
Read Matthew 23 then tell me that Catholicism knows how to interpret the Bible for me.
> you will face the eternal consequences of believing Jesus and the Holy Spirit to be liars.
I’m not claiming Jesus or the Holy Spirit to be liars, only that humans may be liars, or that they interpret things incorrectly. We already know that misinterpretation exists, and that humans don’t have perfect knowledge of the Bible. Also, I don’t believe in eternal consequences. If I were a standard Christian I would still be a universalist. An eternal hell is a retarded concept and has little justification. So I do not fear hell. And even if I went to hell, I don’t even think I would suffer that much, for how could I suffer? Also, I don’t feel much responsibility for my beliefs, as I am flawed and ignorant.

You can believe what you want, and I hope you do truly believe what you say you believe, and that you’re happy. But I do not think this is for me anymore.

>And I say to mankind, Be not curious about God,
>For I who am curious about each am not curious about God,
>(No array of terms can say how much I am at peace about God and about death.)

>I hear and behold God in every object, yet understand God not in the least,
>Nor do I understand who there can be more wonderful than myself.

>Why should I wish to see God better than this day?
>I see something of God each hour of the twenty-four, and each moment then,
>In the faces of men and women I see God, and in my own face in the glass,
>I find letters from God dropt in the street, and every one is sign’d by God’s name,
>And I leave them where they are, for I know that wheresoe’er I go,
>Others will punctually come for ever and ever.

[Anonymous No.19450585]

>>19450534
>I’m not claiming Jesus or the Holy Spirit to be liars, only that humans may be liars, or that they interpret things incorrectly.
Follow what I am saying, friend.
1. John records that Jesus Christ said "when the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all truth. For He will not speak on His own, but He will speak what He hears, and He will declare to you what is to come. He will glorify Me by taking from what is Mine and disclosing it to you [...]"

2. John records that Jesus Christ "breathed on [the apostles] and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit."

3. John, after being filled with the Holy Spirit who Jesus promised would "guide [the apostles] into all truth", then goes on to write the Gospel of John.

4. You are claiming that the Gospel of John contains lies and falsehoods, such as Jesus being the only-begotten Son of the Father.

5. Thus, you are claiming that Jesus is a liar (because you posit the Holy Spirit did NOT guide the apostles into all truth) - and in the process, you are blaspheming both the Holy Spirit, and Jesus.

> And even if I went to hell, I don’t even think I would suffer that much, for how could I suffer?
This is the type of cringe that new-age pseudo-theology does to you. If you are truly alright with gambling on "not suffering that much" in Hell if you go there, you are making an incredibly foolish choice. Please, be humble and reasonable. Do you really want to risk this? What do you have to lose from following the ancient Christian mystical system of theosis/divinization from within the ancient apostolic church? It will give you everything you seek outside of Christ's church, with the benefit of not having to call Jesus Christ a liar.

[Anonymous No.19450625]

>>19449182
Except BIG STUFF did happen. Did you forget the part where your people were kicked out of their homeland? I know only overread retards post here but c'mon man you can't forget basic facts like your people's own history.

[Anonymous No.19450746]

>>19450585
It’s not necessary to believe that Jesus lied to believe that Jesus is not the only Son of God. It’s possible that John lied, or that he wrote while not being under the influence of the Holy Spirit, or that we are simply misinterpreting “only begotten son.”
> This is the type of cringe that new-age pseudo-theology blah blah blah...
Not an argument. What do I have to fear in hell? Can you tell me? If I am content in this life, why should I not be content in hell? Jesus said that the kingdom of heaven is within, so isn’t hell the same? So what exactly would cause me to suffer in this mysterious realm called hell?

[Anonymous No.19451811]

>>19450746
>It’s possible that John lied
And thus, you would have to say that Jesus lied when He said the Holy Spirit would guide the apostles into ALL truth. Or, you would have to admit that you get to selectively choose which verses you like, and which verses you don't, and build your worldview accordingly.
>If I am content in this life, why should I not be content in hell?
"One day the beggar died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s side. And the rich man also died and was buried. In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham from afar, with Lazarus by his side.
So he cried out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue. For I am in agony in this fire.’"

"Then He will say to those on His left, ‘Depart from Me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. [...] And they will go away into eternal punishment."

"If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” and again, “The Lord will judge his people". It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."

Just know that you were shown the words of Christ and the Holy Spirit, and that you can no longer claim ignorance, or that you didn't know. I pray that you ask the Holy Spirit to guide you, and lead you into the truth.