/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19562553]

I feel less connected to God after reading the epistles and revelations than before
The torah, the prophets, the wisdom books, the gospel, all that made crystal clear sense to me and it was beautiful and revelatory and it filled me with a profound sense of peace
But paul and peter and james and john shook my faith to the core
I don't know anything anymore
I've been agonizing over this for days, i can barely function
Pls help

[Anonymous No.19562572]

>>19562553
That's because the letters are from a Roman Secret Policeman to Greek Perverts. They're not about God at all, but about smuggling dionysus into a cult for romans.

[Anonymous No.19562576]

>>19562572
I'm not a biblical scholar but that doesn't sound real..
Can you substantiate that at all?

[Anonymous No.19562587]

>>19562576
Saul/Paul confesses to his role as a roman agent in the Road to Damascus experience. He literally starts his infiltration by a false flag conversion.

Letters are almost entirely to non-Jewish communities of "ex" pagans about how they don't have to attempt to follow the word of god because the spirit of the word is sufficient.

Did you even read the post-gospel texts?

[Anonymous No.19562595]

Realise that Peter and Paul are just men, but through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ they were called.

Paul to be a sword of God, and free the Gentiles from the covenant of genital mutilation given to the Jews, and Peter to carry within him the spirit of the Church.

I am surprised you don't find the books of Peter to be beautiful. What exactly did you take issue with in their writings?

[Anonymous No.19562611]

>>19562587
I'm obviously aware that paul was a persecutor of early christians but that doesn't preclude the possibility of an earnest conversion. And that seems much more likely than him faking conversion for decades and sacrificing everything he had in order to subvert the early church. And being a Jew, why would he want to de-judaize christianity if it was really his intention to disrupt it? Makes no sense

[Anonymous No.19562621]

>>19562611
Paul was a Sadducee aligned Jew. Jesus' "red words," reference Pharisee criticism-self-criticism and Essene practices. Paul was on the other side of the fence to Jesus. Saul literally supported the Temple. Jesus intended to tear it down and rebuild it. Saul worked with the purest of Jews. Jesus worked with gentile god-fearers, Samaritans (who feared God but were unclean), and the most unclean of the Jews.

Why does a man suddenly reverse a life time's political and religious persecution of his worst enemies? Why does this man then go to the *non-god-fearing* gentiles and attempt to incorporate them into a movement which as Jesus said, was founded on the fear of God?

Have you ever organised an underground Zealot movement opposed to Rome and a Temple, building a new kind of Messianic age through the reinterpretation of God's desire to see his people yearn for him?

FFS. READ.

[Anonymous No.19562634]

>>19562595
I understand the concept of a new covenant in which gentiles don't observe mosaic law, that much is supported by the prophets, and hebrews explained the theology behind it very clearly. What I don't understand is how paul's letters are so full of anger and judgement and pride. So much of what he wrote seemed so distant from the gospel.
And yeah actually I don't remember particularly objecting to anything in peter's epistles now that I think about it. It's really just the pauline and johanine works that fucked me up
>>19562621
>Jesus worked with gentile god-fearers, Samaritans
Samaritans aren't gentiles they're just weird jews
>Why does a man suddenly reverse a life time's political and religious persecution of his worst enemies?
That part i can understand, it's through the infinite redemptive power of Christ. I don't object to his conversion, it's his apostolic status that I'm unsure of

[Anonymous No.19562648]

Why did the Holy Spirit allow the early Church to include six forged letters falsely claiming to be written by Paul in its Biblical canon?

[Anonymous No.19562667]

>>19562634
>Samaritans aren't gentiles they're just weird jews
ordered lists take commas between phrases, and samaritans aren't jews mate.

>>19562648
You're taking a text set which claims inspiration's word for its inspiration. Tautologically that's impossible. With an actual text set in real reality where "Sonichu is the best, sonichu says," doesn't work, try looking for the fractures in the text itself. Like the Synoptic problem. Or the triviality and concern with church rule of letters. Or the limited role of the spirit in acts.

[Anonymous No.19562681]

>>19562634
But this is exactly the point. Paul was a persecutor before the grace of the Lord fell upon him. He speaks with anger, pride and judgement, as you say, as was natural to his temperament. And yet, without his force the early Church would not have been organised as it was, and may have even dissolved completely.

The Lord is a master craftsman, and he chooses his tools with an exactness that we can barely comprehend. You must consider the wisdom of the Lord, to call a Pharisee and persecutor of Christian particularly, to forge the early Church and to teach that for the Gentiles circumcision is of the Spirit.

Such a change of heart in the keepers of the law of the Juden, once you have understood this community properly, is truly a miracle worth beholding.

[Anonymous No.19562688]

>>19562667
Incorrect punctuation doesn't hurt my soul, nor does it hurt the legibility of my posts

[Anonymous No.19562701]

>>19562681
Yeah no I understand that and it truly is both miraculous and beautiful, but it doesn't account for all the ways in which Paul deviates from Christ. I read paul and I simply don't understand how this man could be preaching the same faith as our Lord did

[Anonymous No.19562703]

>>19562681
>And yet, without his force the early Church would not have been organised as it was, and may have even dissolved completely.
This was my point entirely.

Before the council of jerusalem only gentiles who emulated the law, particularly the noahide laws given to all men, were of interest to Jesus and his followers. Jesus' mission was to people who already feared God.

After Saul suddenly the Church pivots towards blood eating transvestite fucking heathens as demonstrated in the sauline letters.

Without Saul the Church would be fulfilling Jesus' mission. Who could have caused Saul to enter the church? Pro-tip: not the holy spirit.

>>19562688
It fucking hurts your reading comprehension when you publicly accuse me of calling Samaritans Jews.

[Anonymous No.19562724]

>>19562621
Paul explicitly says he was educated as a pharisee, not a sadducee.

[Anonymous No.19562726]

>>19562724
Sure mate, and that's why he's working for the Temple, not for a local reading group (synagogue).

[Anonymous No.19562728]

>>19562703
This is a very common belief. However, the Lord himself left testimony on this fact, when Saint Peter and Saint Paul met their martyrdom and crucifixion together at Rome, in the image of our Father, as brothers beside one another.

Why do you judge the Father of our Church so harshly, when the Lord himself teaches time and again, judge not lest ye be judged? Perhaps you are but a man as well.

The Holy Spirit does not make us perfect, or guaranteed of salvation as the Protestants falsely teach. There is no better teacher of the truth of the Spirit then Paul when he laments that the Lord called him to do that work which he hates.

[Anonymous No.19562730]

>>19562703
Ok I see my mistake now. So we're both in agreement that samaritans are jews. Sorry

[Anonymous No.19562736]

I am reminded of this:

https://youtu.be/PXtZytG9EA4

[Anonymous No.19562744]

>>19562726
Paul never worked for the temple, not sure what you're referring to, he outright says he is "in observance of the law a Pharisee". Pharisees weren't opposed to the temple in any case.

[Anonymous No.19562757]

>>19562728
>our
Because your text is in the public domain and outside your wiping your mental bum with it a profane text. Your church isn't *our* church, and I can read the text too. And Saul reeks of a mole. And Peter of a dupe. Radically transforming a practice from a Jewish critique to an anti-noahide anything goes but sex in the temple pseudo-dionysian platonist cult is rather obvious if you don't accept Sonichu as real.

Perhaps, mate, "in universe" critique is weak. And this isn't catholicism's fault. All my theology I've read from catholic sources. The fault lays in you.

>>19562730
Fuck you read bad. Almost as bad as a methodist.

[Anonymous No.19562768]

>>19562757
>if you don't accept Sonichu as real.
So the apostles were all dupes? They went to exile and martyr's deaths for a meme?

[Anonymous No.19562769]

>>19562757
I've somewhat lost the plot here if I'm being honest. Also I was baptized and raised methodist and frankly feel a little offended, ours is a beautiful religion

[Anonymous No.19562780]

>>19562769
Go for it son. To the rest of creation you look like furries. Take pride in that.

>>19562768
>In universe.
I hope you're an engineer.

[Anonymous No.19562794]

>>19562780
>"in universe"
If you're wise, speak wisely. Obscuring what you mean to sound smart is not impressive, or conducive to maintaining a discussion. Say what you mean.

[Anonymous No.19562800]

>>19562757
> A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.

[Anonymous No.19562807]

>>19562780
What EXACTLY is wrong with methodism beyond DURR protestant bad

[Anonymous No.19562830]

>>19562807
Methodism was designed as an anti-intellectual observational practice to counter the radical reformation underground (post-diggery) in England. To that end it encouraged a disempowered and infantilised community of worshippers disengaged from a full pursuit of meaning in the text, and instead assigning meaning to a set of life practices guided by an elite (an anti-intellectual elite at that)'s reading of the text.

In a conversation about the text someone so fucking slow that he repeatedly claims Samaritans are Jews is a perfect fucking example. Samaritans had their own fucking temple and differ considerably in law. Yet Jesus preached to them, and to Romans who followed Noah's laws and feared God. He didn't preach to drunk blood eating tranny fucking Greeks with a dionysian-platonist belief unchallenged by an avowed Secret Policeman who worked for the temple and then encouraged such tranny fuckers to dominate Jesus' actual followers who heard him in public before others in favour of a private revelation on a road.

>>19562800
>My waifu is the best and totally not imaginary.

Go for it son. >>>/jp/

[Anonymous No.19562885]

>>19562830
Anon I'm gonna be frank, and I mean this in the nicest way possible, but you sound like a raving lunatic. Fuck is all this about trannies? What trannies were there 2000 years ago?
Methodism is based, as many distinctly American sects are, on the direct experience of the holy spirit. It's a pentecostal faith for simple folk who aren't afraid to speak in tongues and aren't beholden to man-made rituals. If that's objectionable to you then I dunno what to tell you

[Anonymous No.19562893]

>>19562681
well said here.
>>19562807
It is not part of the apostolic lineage.
>>19562553
The basic reason for this is that your faith was heretical. Keep studying the epistles in reference to the rest of scripture and you will come to the Truth.

[Anonymous No.19562906]

>>19562830
Jesus preached against tranny fucking, and charged his disciples with converting the nations with his message. Which Paul did, throughout Cappadocia and beyond. In his letters he condemns homosexuality, and other immoral sexual practices.

Your notion about Paul being a subversive like yourself seems a bit too pat and Ehrman-like. You sound like someone with an ax to grind.

[Anonymous No.19562929]

>>19562885
> on the direct experience of the holy spirit
The Holy Spirit doesn't get transferred to people who don't receive the sacrament of confirmation. The Spirit is passed on from those who received it at the original Pentecost down through history through the sacrament of confirmation. There is no experience of the Spirit outside the Church founded by Christ.

[Anonymous No.19562942]

>>19562893
I can find no scriptural support for apostolic succession, at least not in the capacity it's used now. It seems little more than a justification to do exactly as the pharisees did. The irony of institutions like the catholic or greek churches preaching Christ while simultaneously worshipping icons and man-made rituals is so absurd I hardly have words for it.

[Anonymous No.19563192]

>>19562942
Proverbs 1:8; 4:1; 6:20; 23:22. Besides it makes sense you can't find it in Scripture, even though it is implied, because Scripture ends at the same time as the apostolic age. Its fine though brother, you are free to throw your soul into the abyss just because you think you know better than the Church Fathers who died for our faith. God is good and has given you that freedom.

[Anonymous No.19563200]

>>19563192
The petty antagonnism implicit in your reply makes me doubt what you have to say

[Anonymous No.19563234]

Paul was a freakin CIA agent brah... The whole thing was a psy op lmao... do people not know this?

[Anonymous No.19563250]

>>19563200
I mean everything I said, apologise, and ask forgiveness for the tone. Don't let my frustration allow you to stumble into the abyss please.

[Anonymous No.19563252]

>>19562553
What is this meme theory about Paul secretly being some kind of subversive? Or some kind of deviation from Christ ?
Very silly.

[Anonymous No.19563267]

>>19563250
Ok, I'm sorry if I said too much. But none of that explains the disparity between what Paul says and what Christ says. I don't understand. It's too great a gap to surmount

[Anonymous No.19563272]

>be mad about twitter CIA troon niggers due to having literally nothing better to do with your life
>decide to become a BASED trad Crusader of Our Lord Jesus Christ (pbuh) in order to dab on troon niggers and not be cringe
>read the Bible in order to gain basedness like a real Augustine or Thomas mothafucka
>immediately start seeing CIA glowniggers trannies and cringe among biblical personalities
So this is the power of a /lit/-tier Christian?

I kneel.

[Anonymous No.19563293]

>>19562553
Somebody please help
I was filled with the spirit of the Lord
And now I can hardly pray
I wish I was never born

[Anonymous No.19563303]

>>19563252
pretty sure its some miseducated Hebrew gentleman attempting to do the usual

[Anonymous No.19563418]

>>19563267
Give examples?
>>19563293
Read these psalms in this order as a penitential act and offering to God, 6, 102, 143, 130, 38, 51, 32. [Protestant/Hebrew numbering], then go to confession [or receive the sacraments of initiation in an apostolic Church [orthodox or catholic]].

[Anonymous No.19563541]

>>19562553
the bible and everything else is a microcosm of samsara as a whole and thus reflects the same pattern of beautiful thing consumed by death/misery/illusion. a book as evil as revelations (which in itself contains beauty because it too is a microcosm) is only the symmetrical downward wave motion of the beauty and grace of the upward wave motion. the way out of this back and forth hellscape is recognizing the duality to transcend it.

[Anonymous No.19563551]

>19563541
>the bible and everything else is a microcosm of samsara as a whole and thus reflects the same pattern of beautiful thing consumed by death/misery/illusion. a book as evil as revelations (which in itself contains beauty because it too is a microcosm) is only the symmetrical downward wave motion of the beauty and grace of the upward wave motion. the way out of this back and forth hellscape is recognizing the duality to transcend it.

[Anonymous No.19563559]

>>19562553
My friend felt connected to god after taking psychedelics
It stops after a while

[Anonymous No.19563582]

>>19563541
>>19563551
the duality of samsara

[Anonymous No.19564376]

>>19562553
Time to read Nietzsche then

[Anonymous No.19565537]

>>19562553
Bump

[Anonymous No.19565771]

>>19563267
>>19563418
You still haven't given me any specific instances were you feel St Paul is contradicting the Gospels. I'd like to try and help but I need to know on what details you have trouble.

[Anonymous No.19565792]

>>19562553
lmao what's wrong with sentimentalists. just get a grip

[Anonymous No.19566453]

bump

[Anonymous No.19566710]

>>19562634
>What I don't understand is how paul's letters are so full of anger and judgement and pride.

There is a very complex play of emotions in Paul. To the extent there is anger, it turns on his conviction of the truth, and his vexation at seeing it subverted; in turn, that vexation is piqued by his frustration that communities that were doing well could seemingly so easily be turned away from the truth. There is probably, too, an element of personal pique or indignation arising from his certain knowledge of the depth of his own theology vs. the evidently less profound but somehow persuasive efforts of - in most cases - the 'Judaizers'. I sense a different dynamic in his confrontation with Peter, although it too certainly has an element of indignation.

In contrast to those emotions, there is also a great deal of compassion and love in Paul's writings -- it is amazing to me how vividly these passionate emotions come through the text.

Give Paul a second chance. At a certain point, it's hard not to love the man, in his honesty, fervor, brilliance, love and complete self-sacrifice. He was one of a kind.

[Anonymous No.19566852]

>>19565771
i gotta be honest anon i don't wanna discuss this with you because you're clearly speaking from a place of catholic dogma that i simply do not agree with
>>19565792
>get a grip
i'm trying ok
>>19566710
i do appreciate how distinctly earnest and human Paul's writing is, and i see the love in it too. i just don't know if i can see him as a theological authority
also how am i supposed to view all these different writers as authoritative when they didn't even agree with each other? some of the letters even seem to be responses to each other, debating each other's understanding of the gospel. what the fuck do i do with that? for a while i was able to accept that i don't understand everything about scripture but it's bothering me more and more every day

[Anonymous No.19566874]

>>19562553
>loves OT and hates NT
it's an anon converts to Judaism thread
but what if anon read the Quran?

[Anonymous No.19566905]

>>19566874
but i love the gospels and hebrews
and i don't "hate" the other stuff i just find it profoundly confusing
i was planning on reading the qu'ran soon for its historical and literary significance but i would never convert to islam if that's you're thinking

[Anonymous No.19567003]

>>19566852
How can you expect to understand the truth when you reject the counsel of the truthful out of hand? I want to help you but your rejecting my offer. This is a tale as old as time. Unless your willing to be truly humble and admit that the ortho-catholicism maybe be the truth then you will always be caught in your own pride even if wr don't have the truth because you will be valuing your own judgement more than God's.

[Anonymous No.19567038]

>>19567003
i'm not contending with God's judgement i'm contending with the judgement of a few men
Christ said "But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. and call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ."
i do not understand how this saying can be reconciled with Paul, apostolic succession, or the ecclesiastical church system as a whole

[Anonymous No.19567043]

>>19566852
It sounds like you need to keep reading them. I recommend you ask the Jehovah's witnesses for a copy of their bible and look at the comparative verse notes. Its quite well done. The translation I don't find that compelling and their theology is basically docetism but their notes and verse comparisons are well done. They allow you too see how much more agreement there is between the apostles than disagreement. The thing is, they may have had disagreements but the faith wouldn't have flourished like it did if they hadn't of been blessed with the Spirit to have patience and understanding that made them capable of reconciling their differences.

[Anonymous No.19567053]

>>19562553
Funny, I feel the opposite.

Just realize that the Bible is diverse in its approaches, because the nature of God is too vast to be approached from a single angle. Different scriptures speak to different elements of the faith, and as long as you understand that it's ALL the Word of God, you'll be alright.

[Anonymous No.19567062]

>>19562553
I dont know I have not read the new or old testament

[Anonymous No.19567101]

>>19567043
i dunno i've heard that jehova's deliberately translated the bible in a way that supported their own idiosyncratic beliefs. i'm not sure if i trust those guys
>>19567053
how do i know certain books are the word of God when the canonization process was so haphazard and arbitrary? also the epistles never even purport to be the word of God and aren't conventionally understood as such
>Just realize that the Bible is diverse in its approaches, because the nature of God is too vast to be approached from a single angle. Different scriptures speak to different elements of the faith
thank you for this though. i used to understand this concept and feel it very easily, but for some reason i've been struggling with it lately

[Anonymous No.19567172]

>>19566852
>some of the letters even seem to be responses to each other, debating each other's understanding of the gospel. what the fuck do i do with that?

Christianity is characterized by a constant search for truth -- this is a struggle, inevitably at times an agon. Now, I have wondered about this: Why would God do things this way?? And the best I can come up with as a personal answer to that question is that, God knows, all human epistemologies are fallible. The interpretation of any text, even a relatively simple text, is very difficult to cabin. Interpretation never ends. Thus, a perfect book descending from the heavens would *not* solve the problem. But on the other hand, the best approximation of or approach to the truth often arises through two (or more) conflicting opinions, haggled over and (sometimes) resolved. Now I know, there's certainly no guarantee that truth will out from conflict, and sometimes it can make things worse. But such a method and approach *sometimes* does work (thus, in the 'trial' system (which replaced trial by ordeal, by fire, and the like), we systematically set two opposing claims against each other, as advanced by skilled partisans, and a neutral panel decides the matter; fwiw, the one time I was a juror, I thought the system worked; a similar dynamic is in play in the legal appellate system, and if there wasn't a structure built in to put a stop to it (a Supreme Court of some kind), the conflict would likely go on forever).

Thus, the agon of the Christian aspiration to truth - upon which salvation depends, which is what puts the fire in the conflict, and that includes a good deal of the fire in Paul - can be seen working itself out in history in a series of Church councils in the first millennium: the Council of Nicea (where one Church Father punched another in the jaw), of Chalcedon, Ephesus, etc. These in turn are patterned on the council in Jerusalem described in Acts 15.

It's all very human stuff - all too human. But infused with divinity, too, in some mysterious way. And maybe in the end something beautiful in the way God allows things to play out, not as a game or a pre-scripted play, but in the struggle between one free human will against another.

What do you do with it? The thought occurs, give Chesterton's book 'Orthodoxy' a try. It discusses these very issues. It's short, and quite good, I think (although, tbph, Chesterton's style is not for everyone). It may help you to digest, if you will, the conflicts in scripture that are so roiling -- roiling in the first century, and roiling to us when we read them two thousand years later.

[Anonymous No.19567225]

>>19567172
thank you anon. i think, on a cognitive level, i've always understood this, but emotionally i'm suffering on account of it. the search for truth is agonizing lately. i wish i had similarly minded friends to talk about this stuff with to set my mind at ease but most of my irl friends aren't very religious and just look at me funny when i talk about theology.
and thanks for the recc, i've got a couple books i have to read so i can give them back to people but i'll read it after that

[Anonymous No.19567255]

imagine thinking a limited mind like yours (or paul's or peter's et al) can have any concept of an infinite being, even an inking

truly, human hubris knows no bounds

[Anonymous No.19567266]

>>19567225
I don't wish to sound sanctimonious, but please do pray. Pray to God for light and guidance. These prayers work, in my experience anyway, but it is a delicate and mysterious process, that often does not go by our preferred timetable. It is question of trusting in the goodness of God, which can sometimes be difficult. (Why does it have to be difficult? I don't know, but the answer probably turns in some way on human freedom.)

Blessings, anon.

[Anonymous No.19567323]

>>19567255
when u right u right
>>19567266
much appreciated friend. i try to pray every day but sometimes the words just won't come. but i'll keep at it

[Anonymous No.19567376]

>>19562553
>Getting depressed over dumbfuck fairy tales
Lmao, they don't lie when they say religion is for the weak minds.