[ 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: 48 KB, 600x848, his-24.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19462142 No.19462142 [Reply] [Original]

I can respect the Bible and the Quran as influential literary, ethical, and even metaphysical works in their own right, but one issue I have is why-- why should I convert to an Abrahamic religion when it's history is not my own? It's lore is not my own but some political Jewish lore about people seething about land and waiting for a kingdom to come. It isn't something for me and this thinking is why I was turned away from Christianity--

I find it rather suspicious and stupid that throughout all of history, God was with nobody else but with this small sect of Jews in the middle of buttfuck nowhere, and only they "knew the real deal" up until the NT arrives where Jesus comes and somehow "the old covenant is repealed" (ahem sorry, I meant "fulfilled."). Then Muhammad comes in as a violent warlord that has to use barbaric means, working fruitfully to unite Semites, who were always historically a barbaric race, with verses that conveniently allow him to fuck multiple women...

Tell me again, why, convince me why, I should convert to your religion? Jew, Muslim, Christian, some weird Larper, why should I convert to Abrahamic Theology when my own Ethnic religions were enough? What does the history of thousands of years of events and kingdoms in a backwater have to offer me?

I personally feel Abrahamic Religion is more political than it is Esoteric. I would like any of you folks to convince me out of this idea, without any mental gymnastics.

>> No.19462159

The messenger-city dialectic in the Qur'an is why you should believe.

>> No.19462201
File: 110 KB, 772x1024, 0F29ACB1-33A6-4989-B1C8-DC0D21738F86.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19462201

>>19462142
If you are reading the Bible as some sort of work of Jewish supremacy, you are misreading the Bible. Israelites in the OT were predominately of one people, but not exclusively, and there are many verses that demonstrate this, as well as the fact that the inclusion of the Gentiles into the people of God was always planned since the time of Abraham, who was promised by God that through his descendent that all nations of the Earth would be blessed (clearly pointing to Jesus). If you want a further substantiation of these claims I’d be happy to provide them.

You should convert to Christianity because it is true. There are numerous prophecies such as Daniel 9.24-27 confirmed in history and other Christological prophecies in the OT which all point to the events of the NT. Especially since Pentecost, the Church has been something of universal scope and mission, far above any one single ethnic nation. Ethnic pagan religions just can’t compete with any of this that I have said. Many people came close to aspects of the truth, but they never embodied the full Truth, which is Jesus Christ.

>> No.19462235

>>19462142
>why should I convert to an Abrahamic religion when it's history is not my own
If you speak English it is your own.
If you're a native speaker or ESL, it's because English is the lingua franca, and, like France before it, it only became such because of over a thousand years of devout Christian rule pushing it, and all civilization adjacent to it, forward.
To deny that is just a larp.

>> No.19462268

>>19462201
I'm not sure why prophecies make the Bible an objective source. Oracles have always existed; they used their knowledge of the future to mislead people and to make a profit, and to claim divinity. I think prophecies are important, but if that's all you have then you fail to establish why someone should take christology seriously. Got any other reasons?

>> No.19462299

>>19462268
This prophecy is of a much different nature:
https://archived.moe/lit/thread/19347144/#q19348299
https://archived.moe/lit/thread/19347144/#q19348306
It is very compelling, but not the only reason for one to believe. It’s just a piece of evidence, and important evidence because it is so clearly substantiated in the historical record.

>> No.19462319

>>19462299
This isn't a response.

>> No.19462333

>>19462142
Islam doesn't see those tales as Jewish, but rather retools them to say you have to worship Allah or be destroyed like every other group including the Jews.

>> No.19462337

>>19462299
Are you citing yourself as evidence? A new low for danielfag

>> No.19462384

>>19462142
Idc what you are but the most worked out religions are abrahamic so if you're seeking truth then you might as well start there.

>> No.19462431

>>19462142
>why should I convert to an Abrahamic religion when it's history is not my own?
I don't know how to say this in a way that doesn't sound like /pol/ or like I'm a Jew myself, but it is absolutely undeniable that Jews are quite something; they're a kind of people unlike any other, for better or for worse. Even to this day their own particular history is unfolding. You cannot simply dismiss the history of the Jews as the history of the Jews, as you can do that with the Chinese or the Spaniards, or the Africans. Of course in this global age, we live a global story, but if you look at the scale of human history, which is really quite small, everything about the Jews makes sense from a Biblical perspective. I think the whole world is in a way tied to the Jews by the roots, and so the whole world's story is in a sense a Jewish story; and this story through Jesus has become a Jewish story; and through the Jews, Jesus has made their history ours.

>> No.19462451

>>19462431
I think that's interesting because I would argue the opposite. They seem like spiritual sponges up until second temple happens. Yahweh is grabbed from Egypt, Genesis from Babylonia, the concept of El and other spiritual battles are between caananites like the golden bull.

>> No.19463622

>>19462201
Wasn't Daniel and some profecies written long after the events have transpired and were compiled as "fact" to prove that somebody was a prophet or whatever?

>> No.19463627

>>19462384
OP here, the most popularly adopted does not mean "worked out," and the most mental gymnastics to prove something doesn't make it "worked out" but dishonest. It's dishonest and I feel disillusioned is all.

>> No.19463641

>>19462431
For influence I read yes, but Jews have no impact on my own history. I am an Oriental and for the majourity of my ethnicity's history, there was no Judaism. It makes little sense for me to adopt the history.

Personally I think Jews out of all the three faiths are more honest, but insofar as they are blunt with their faith. The faith beyond the rhetoric of the Rabbi is just nihilism and it doesn't encourage anyone to abide by a code.