Renaissance Paganism

[Anonymous No.20775306]

Is there any renaissance and medieval literature where authentic pagan traditions survive?

Obviously hermeticism, neo-platonism, orphism and ancient mythologies - but what else? What obscure little known texts have you come across?

[Anonymous No.20775319]

>>20775306
Pagan traditions did get integrated into Christianity.

[Anonymous No.20775340]

>>20775306
Just as the Old Testament prepared the way of Christ for the Jews, in the same way ancient pagan sages prepared the way of Christ for the gentiles. All that was worthwhile in ancient paganism is in Christianity but in a perfected form.

[Anonymous No.20775365]

>>20775306
the paganism of the Renaissance was based on the rediscovery of pagan texts, not on a tradition with lineage, it was basically the first neo-paganism

[Anonymous No.20775370]

>>20775306
Beowulf
Arthurian Cycle
Nibelungenlied

[Anonymous No.20775406]

>>20775340
Please take your judeo-centric world view to another thread please. Thanks.

[Anonymous No.20775413]

>>20775365
Gemistos Pletho was the inheritor of a continuous hellenic tradition and it was he who sparked the renaissance, arguably the renaissance itself was of pagan origin

[Anonymous No.20775422]

Didn't Plethon adhere to Proclus more theistic and religious interpretation of neoplatonism, rather than Plotinus' more Buddhist like interpretation?

[Anonymous No.20775443]

>>20775370
I would classify them all under ancient mythologies

What about planetary magic found in Ficino, Agrippa and elsewhere? Could this be classified as pagan?

[Anonymous No.20775450]

Instructions to summon Fairies in this manuscript

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liber_Officiorum_Spirituum#Fairies

[Anonymous No.20775503]

Ficino wrote some pretty overtly pagan stuff

>De vita is an amalgam of philosophy, medicine, magic and astrology. Alongside passages explaining the immortality and divine source and nature of the soul, there are astrological charts and remedies, speeches from various Greek gods arguing with one another, philosophical digressions, medieval prescriptions for various ills, attempts at reconciling the Neoplatonism of Plotinus with Christian scripture, and magical remedies and talismans.

>Ficino was one of the major philosophical voices of the Italian Renaissance, but he was also a physician, and the son of a physician. De vita is an example of the medical thinking of the early Renaissance, steeped in Galen and Hippocrates and the theory of the four humors and their attendant Aristotelian qualities (e.g., hot, cold, moist, dry), but also beginning to align this viewpoint with the awakening sense of the archetypal significance of the pagan gods, derived from the first exposure in the West for many centuries to the dialogues of Plato and to the Hermetica. (Ficino was the first translator of Plato into Latin.)

>The result—particularly in the third book—is a work which takes the pagan Classical god-archetypes quite literally, and personifies them with the planets which are named for them. For Ficino, the planets affect the tenor and vigor of the intellectual's mind and the health of his body. But the main thrust of de Vita is the notion that there are remedies and balances that can be undertaken to mitigate their effect—in fact, to change the temper, even the fate, of a human being. In this regard, Ficino shows his deeply humanist point of view, which sets him apart from earlier writers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_vita_libri_tres

[Anonymous No.20775506]

>>20775443
Yes, it comes from the Harranian Sabians whose lineage came from the Platonists banished from Athens by Justinian.

[Anonymous No.20775547]

>>20775422
Bizarre hermeneutic.

[Anonymous No.20775930]

>>20775547
Idiot retard.

[Anonymous No.20775953]

>>20775306

[Anonymous No.20776088]

>>20775413
>was the inheritor of a continuous hellenic tradition
literally no lmao, he took it all from books, that's why he mixed it wirh living zoroastrian tradition

[Anonymous No.20776265]

>>20775306
>Is there any renaissance and medieval literature where authentic pagan traditions survive?
"Authentic" as in dating back to pre-Christianity? Nope. Last pagans die out in like the 9th century in a tiny peninsula in southern Greece.

[Anonymous No.20776273]

>>20775340
I reached a similar conclusion myself and it's largely why I abandoned NeoPaganism.

[Anonymous No.20776308]

>>20776265
>Last pagans die out in like the 9th century
Nope
>The Christianization of Lithuania occurred in 1387. It signified the official adoption of Christianity by Lithuania, the last pagan country in Europe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianization_of_Lithuania

I can also think of two authentic living traditions around today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mari_people#Religion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udmurt_Vos

There are also countless historical anecdotes of small scale pagan survivals throughout europe in remote locations, for example - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inishkea_Islands#Pagan_religion_and_The_Godstone

And countless folkish traditions in nearly every village throughout europe.

[Anonymous No.20776321]

>>20776308
Oh sure, there were plenty of illiterates in the frozen north who abandoned paganism late.

[Anonymous No.20776373]

>>20775319
fpbp

[Anonymous No.20776406]

>>20775340
Begone, semitic demon!

[Anonymous No.20776956]

>>20775306
>>20775365

No. And the whole Renaissance brought back paganism is meme. It is quite the opposite. Pagan Gods became an even bigger joke.

> The gods had withdrawn when ancient Rome fell to the barbarians, but now that Agostino Chigi had restored its ancient splendour by building the Villa Farnesina, they would descend from the heavens once more. That, at least, is what the poets claimed, but it did not happen quite as they imagined. Even as representations of the pagan gods proliferated, everyone continued to insist that they were alien and unwelcome intruders in a Christian society. And in a sense they were right, for the gods never regained the status they had lost. Though some people occasionally claimed to be their devotees, it was usually anti-clerical bravado rather than statement of fact. There is no symmetry between the destruction and revival of pagan antiquity. Christianity had set out either to destroy pagan imagery or else replace it with an iconography of its own. But in the Renaissance, mythological imagery was not really in competition with Christian art.

> For one thing, there was not enough of it, and for another, mythological pagan imagery was initially heavily concentrated in the decorative arts where no one took it seriously. From Savonarola onwards, some individual reformers, both Catholic and Protestant, sought to suppress it for its licentiousness, but overall its spread was remarkably unaffected by the religious upheavals of the sixteenth century. It was of marginal interest to Protestant iconoclasts, and even in the Counter-Reformation the chief concern was to keep mythological art in its place rather than suppress it altogether. To avoid giving the impression that they were encouraging idolatry, patrons did not usually display the gods in contexts where they might arouse such feelings. Statues and paintings of pagan deities are rarely to be found in churches, and the medieval vision of idolatry in which a naked statue of a god stands on top of a pillar in an urban setting was avoided as well. There was no attempt to provide pagan substitutes for the visual and spiritual experiences that sacred art provided.

> The return of the gods did not lead to their acceptance as deities, or to the rejuvenation of pagan religion, but rather to a steady increase in the fictive and the false. By the early eighteenth century, classical mythology had so expanded these categories that it furnished the stock examples of the unreal. As Hume noted, 'We have been so accustomed to the names of Mars, Jupiter, Venus, that in the same manner as education infixes any opinion, the constant repetition of these ideas makes them enter into the mind with facility, and prevail upon the fancy, without influencing the judgement.' Hume is here echoing the sentiments of earlier French writers who, from Fontenelle onwards, had started to comment on a strange and relatively novel phenomenon.

(1/2)

[Anonymous No.20776963]

>>20776956
> From an early age, people were now habituated to an entire culture whose content no one believed or even took seriously. As the Abbe Pluche complained, 'Men pass their youth among the gods. At their leaving the schools, they find them again on the stage . . . All publick shews repeat their adventures. You find them in your cantatas, songs, in the decorations of your apartments, gardens, and publick squares. Ingravings, pictures, poems, music, pleasant writings, learned dissertations, all in short conspire to show us under an honorable and pleasing outside, actions punished by the laws, and absurdities diametrically opposed to common sense.' None of this was designed to persuade the spectator of the reality of the events portrayed, for everyone accepted that mythologies were 'figures void of sense, and destitute of signification', and that Jupiter, Neptune, and Mars were nothing more than 'three puppets, fit at best to come down in a miraculous manner by a cord, to amuse children at the theatre'.

> Fontenelle himself was in a good position to evaluate the effect of such entertainments, for he had written the libretto to Colasse's opera Thetis et Pelee, staged in 1689. But as his essay De Vorigine des fables revealed, he was already conscious that mythology was nothing but 'a mass of chimeras, day-dreams, and absurdities'.31 From the time of the Greeks, it had been perpetuated through painting and poetry which, by giving expression to the imaginings of those who had invented the gods, fed the imagination of those who came afterwards. Even now, when no one believed in the fables of the Greeks, they were still maintained by means of poetry and painting. There was, he suggested, no better proof of the independence of reason and imagination than the fact that things about which reason is wholly undeceived may nevertheless lose none of their appeal to the imagination.

> Noting the similarity of some classical myths to those of the ‘savage’ indigenous population of the Americas, Fontenelle attributed the mythology of the ancients to their sheer ignorance. It was not that they knew the truth and concealed it in myth, they just did not know any better. Modern societies may no longer accept the same sort of nonsense, but they too know how to perpetuate their errors: 'All men resemble one another so much that there is no people whose foolishness should not make us tremble.'

(2/2)

[Anonymous No.20776992]

>>20776406
Kill yourself, Farouk. You will never be Aryan.

[Anonymous No.20777023]

>>20776956
>>20776963
If they were so insignificant they simply wouldn't have proliferated as they did, Christian cope I'm afraid.

You don't see depictions of biblical scenes in pop culture because it doesn't really resonate with the western mind as our native mythologies do.

[Anonymous No.20777051]

>>20775370
Arthur isn’t paganoid. The historical Arthur fought and killed paganoid Saxons as Gildas is proof.

> However, 'Artorius' could scarcely have been the name of a Celtic god, and there is no trace of any pre-Christian divinity whose name could have evolved into Arthur by another route.This deity has never been more than a speculation, concocted for the sake of the theory. A notion that Arthur began as the war
god of a fifth-century pagan revival is refuted by the silence of Gildas, who denounces his British fellow-Christians for just about every sin except apostasy.
He would have denounced neo-paganism if there had been any.

[Anonymous No.20777099]

>>20777023
What Christian cope, idiot? Malcolm Bull isn’t a Christian. You’re the one coping. Decorative art is what it is. You think people who put statues of Buddha in their bathroom means they worship and respect him? You probably also think Marvel’s Thor is a sign of worship lol

[Anonymous No.20777102]

Neo-pythagoreanism, alchemy

[Anonymous No.20777107]

>>20777051
There is a plethora of pagan motifs in Arthurian literature, especially the pre-Galfridian sources with many Celtic Gods being invoked

>Culhwch also recounts Arthur's nearby rescue of another of the three famous prisoners, Mabon ap Modron, a god of poetry after whom the Mabinogi are named, and gives details of another ruler of Annwfn, Gwynn ap Nudd, king of the Tylwyth Teg - the fairies in Welsh lore - "whom God has placed over the brood of devils in Annwn lest they should destroy the present race". Gwynn is also made part of Arthur's retinue, though he is the son of a god, after Arthur intervenes in his dispute over Creiddylad.

Even the grail is derivative of the pagan sacred cauldron

[Anonymous No.20777119]

>>20777102
>Neo-pythagoreanism
I would lump this in with platonism
>alchemy
What are the pagan origins of alchemy? And what are the core texts?

[Anonymous No.20777137]

>>20775406
>and it was he who sparked the renaissance
No
>Many argue that the ideas characterizing the Renaissance had their origin in Florence at the turn of the 13th and 14th centuries, in particular with the writings of Dante Alighieri (1265–1321) and Petrarch (1304–1374), as well as the paintings of Giotto di Bondone (1267–1337). Some writers date the Renaissance quite precisely; one proposed starting point is 1401, when the rival geniuses Lorenzo Ghiberti and Filippo Brunelleschi competed for the contract to build the bronze doors for the Baptistery of the Florence Cathedral (Ghiberti then won).[25] Others see more general competition between artists and polymaths such as Brunelleschi, Ghiberti, Donatello, and Masaccio for artistic commissions as sparking the creativity of the Renaissance.

[Anonymous No.20777164]

>>20777023
What Christian cope, idiot? Malcolm Bull isn’t one to begin with. I’m not a Christian either.

You’re the one coping. Decorative art is what it is. It’s not sacred art like in Catholic countries. Protestant countries were also forbidden from making Christian art into decorative art. You think people who put statues of Buddha in their bathroom means they genuinely worship and respect him? You probably also think Marvel’s Thor is a sign of worship and respect lol

Also

> It was Torquato Tasso who eventually spelled out the problem. If you are writing a poem on a classical subject, you have a choice: either you can include the pagan gods, or else you can leave them out. If you exclude them, you are sacrificing the opportunity to deal with the marvellous, because your poem will include nothing supernatural; but if you include them, your poem will not be lifelike or believable, for what the pagans accepted is simply incredible. In Tasso's opinion, modern epics should deal with Christian rather than pagan topics, because only then can you portray events that are both marvellous and lifelike.

[Anonymous No.20777169]

>>20775306
Why are people so desperate to return to paganism? Just take out what you like from Christian sources and leave what you don't like, maybe insert some post-structuralism, and pre Socratic fragments and make your own beliefs

[Anonymous No.20777195]

>>20777169
Soulless bugman philosophy

[Anonymous No.20777211]

>>20777164
There has always been an under current of paganism throughout the renaissance

>Marullus also composed a collection of hymns, the Hymni naturales, in which he celebrates the ancient Olympian pantheon.

[Anonymous No.20777228]

>>20777023
>>20777164

Check out John Milton. He uses pagan Gods a lot in his poems. Yet when push came to shove, he describes all the Greek Gods as demons in paradise lost and continuously denounces them.
Same thing with Sandro Botticelli who became something of a Christian extremist later in life.

Use of pagan mythology in art by Christians in the past doesn’t mean respect or agreement.

[Anonymous No.20777359]

>>20777023
Have you been to Louvre Museum? I felt like 90% of past art there was biblical. It was kind of boring after all.

As for modern pop culture. I agree. Modern west isn’t Christian anymore so I’m not sure what you’re getting at by saying there is no depiction of biblical scenes. True today it seems. Certainly not true in the past. But we’re speaking about the past here, aren’t we?

[Anonymous No.20777430]

>>20777359
The doctrine of "prisca theologia" asserted by renaissance thinkers and veiling pagan theurgy as "planetary astral magic" is about as openly pagan as one could be without being crushed by the prevailing judaic forces

And as you say, in modernity when those forces have somewhat lessened their grip, the european soul no longer under bondage eagerly leaves Christianity behind and drifts towards pagan thought like a moth to a flame

[Anonymous No.20777441]

Using this thread I want to ask a question. What means freedom for conservatives if it’s not emancipation?

[Anonymous No.20777487]

>>20777430
Like Unitarian Universalism? Cucked shit.

What do you mean lessened their grip? Cause as its grip actually loosened in the 18th century, it just led to the denial of Prisca theologia.

> The Enlightenment tended to view all religion as cultural variations on a common anthropological theme;[5] however, the Enlightenment, which tended to deny the validity of any form of revealed religion, held in very little esteem the idea of a prisca theologia.

The whole Christianity is similar to what these pagan philosophers have taught has long been a thing among Christian apologists since antiquity. Stop confusing conversion tactics for genuinely pro-pagan beliefs.

[Anonymous No.20777500]

>>20777430
What about the modern western world gives you the impression that it has drifted towards pagan thought besides marvel movies and sexual degeneracy?

[Anonymous No.20777503]

>>20777487
No, like perennialism.
Yes you're right, after Christianity weakened, those wishing to express a non-abrahamic theology didn't have to do so through the pilpul of a prisca theologia. That was my point.

>as soon as you aren't burnt at the stake for being pagan, pagans start popping out of the woodwork
>imagine my shock

[Anonymous No.20777515]

>>20777500
Maybe the huge resurgence and growth of explicitly neopagan faiths that constitute probably the fastest growing religion of native europeans. Or is that too obvious?

[Anonymous No.20777572]

>>20777503
People wouldn’t have been burnt for being pagan for three centuries now (since the enlightenment).

Despite this, neopagans have only produced insignificant losers and no one culturally impressive. Maybe when you do then I’ll believe it is the “ fastest growing religion.”

[Anonymous No.20777596]

>>20777515
> Maybe the huge resurgence and growth of explicitly neopagan faiths that constitute probably the fastest growing religion of native europeans

Fucking lol. Just no. That’s Islam. Future Europe is far more likely to be Muslim than pagan

Paganshits really are delusional just like their myths, so it makes sense

[Anonymous No.20777606]

>>20777515
>>20777596
>people with a negative birth rate thinks anything they do matters
absolutely delusional

[Anonymous No.20777631]

>>20777606
Are you excited for those 90 year old neopagans?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ageing_of_Europe

Oh yes, the world will never be the same again after Europe becomes OLD and PAGAN.

But seriously, I can’t imagine Christianity or paganism mattering in future Europe. Current evidence only shows Europe will decline in population and become old beyond doubt.

[Anonymous No.20777633]

>>20777596
There are near zero native euros converting to islam retard

[Anonymous No.20777640]

>>20777572
I'll be honest, I can't think of ANY contemporary religious figures who could be described as "impressive"

>>20777606
Behaviour is downstream from culture, more tribal religiosity = higher birth rates

[Anonymous No.20777645]

>>20777633
there are near zero native euros being born.

[Anonymous No.20777664]

>>20777195
I guess. Aren't we all at this point?

[Anonymous No.20777668]

>>20775306
My diary desu

[Anonymous No.20777676]

kekking @ raging Christians in here. Never forget that you yourselves (and especially the Calvinists) began the rationalization and disenchantment process. No sacred trees! No sacred blood! No sacred state! Funny thing is that what was once your weapon against pagans has gotten out of your hands and killed your God too. I think you get so mad because you just can't fathom why someone with a theistic mindset would turn *gasp* back (progressive reading of history moment by the way) to paganism rather than go to you. Still the same spiritual imperiousness. That's actually why you were historically surpassed by stuff like Unitarian Universalism (the religion that most normies believe in whether they know it or not) and Liberalism. To these people you and your fixation on that Jesus guy and that book smacks of paganism, which here means something like "particularistic, backward, exclusive, rustic, embarrassing".
Also a great irony that Christianity is being relegated to the same peripheral, rural existence that Christians forced pagans into back in the day

[Anonymous No.20777692]

>>20777676
Kek, it is true, Christianity was proto-bioleninism, and contemporary Christians are finding that out the hard way.

[Anonymous No.20777879]

>>20777676
> Trust me. 2 more weeks and we’ll all be pagan!!

Also I’m not a Christian, faggot.

[Anonymous No.20778290]

>>20777631
Pagans in America are super fucking fertile. But then, religion period in America correlates with fertility. Someone is going to get butthurt about Wicca so I'll just inb4: Wicca isn't a religion, it's a form of atheism, hence the birth rate of zero.

>>20777169
>desperate
This is implying that people aren't already doing it. They are. There's no "returning", people have already returned. The initiatory lineages are back, it's up to you to reject hylicness. Many of these groups have people who were born and raised in them. A better question to ask would be why are people so desperate to return to some kind of hyper authoritarian Catholicism that confuses Christianity with the Imperial Creed from 40k despite being Americans from long lineages of Methodists and Quakers.

The answer is that because they desperately want a ready-made intellectual package that they can adopt to give them a personality without having to do any work what so ever while ALSO being totally socially acceptable with zero personal reflection or criticism possible. If you take up Asatru, you are self-consciously committing yourself to not only doing "Homework: The Religion", but are also clearly making an active personal choice that can only be explained via a personal and sincere decision to do this. You can't do "well I was just born in it and the churches are pretty and something something something those WHACKY LIBERALS AMIRITE???" to explain away doing blots to fucking Thor, and you can't do "well look the POPE SAYS that we have to..." to explain away invoking Freyja at a symbel. The only way to find yourself there is that you wanted to be there. That requires a level of sincerity that irony poisoned losers absolutely cannot stomach.

This is why these losers trying to RETVRN are entirely concerned with dumb shit like "authenticity" instead of the reality of the deities or what not: because they're scared shitless at the thought of ever having to actually hold a meaningful belief that they believe in rather than just being able to explain away on social pressure, because they're terrified of social pressure.

[Anonymous No.20778572]

Paganism never died out, it only went underground. The real resurgence of paganism was in the Renaissance and Enlightenment, when we saw blatant attempts to undermine Christianity with a hodgepodge of deistic ideas, the worship of things like ‘reason’ and ‘nature’ and humanism in general. Many of this was drawn from classical sources like Cicero, Lucretius, Epicurus, etc. and this sort of thinking culminates in the French Revolution and Masonic attempts to institute a ‘year zero’ (sounds like the Great Reset!), removing the Christian calendar, setting up non-Christian cults like the Cult of Reason complete with anthropomorphized ‘goddesses’ of liberty and other virtues, or the Cult of the Supreme Beimg. This is all paganism. Darwinism is a form of pagan mythology too, adopted by Masonic and Hindu ideas. In the 19th and 20th centuries, all sorts of gurus and frauds from India came about shilling Hinduism, Buddhism, Theosophy and New Age ideas. During this period pagan practices like homosexuality, infanticide and divorce became more common. Even the idea of UFOs and space beings is just revived pagan pantheons, shilled by Jews in Hollywood to revive the cult of pagan gods who ‘benevolently’ seed planets with life, teach savages civilization, and are ‘highly evolved’. The interplay with New Age ideas is too obvious to point out, and these ‘aliens’ often spout New Age platitudes pulled straight from Advaita Vedanta or other sorts of DMT / LSD ‘revelations’ (in common with shamanism). Even the green agenda is linked heavily with the idea of ‘Mother Nature’ or ‘Gaia’ which is purely pagan. When tons of Americans and Westerners in general believe in Hindu nonsense like yoga, meditation, karma and reincarnation, you don’t need to go anywhere for ‘muh paganism’. You’ll find paganism during ‘pride month’ parading in the streets as much as you will find it among smelly hippies babbling about how we are all ‘one’.

Off to go buy my Marvel Thor idol, er.. I mean funkopop

[Anonymous No.20778583]

>>20777676
You're posting like a technologically disabled zoomer on the most disenchanted and ultimately "Christian" platform of all time. You might as well be speaking directly into the gaping jaws of the Beast itself. You don't get to pretend you're holier than thou.

[Anonymous No.20778915]

>>20778572
You’re actually not the first one to believe this lol. The half-French/half-English 19th century architect named Pugin (known for his contribution to Palace of Westminster) believed there was a pagan conspiracy that began with the renaissance (which he also connects to the reformation) that culminated in the French Revolution. He wrote:

> It is by no means comparable to either St. Peter's of York or St. Peter s of Westminster, in both of which churches every original detail and emblem is of the purest Christian design, and not one arrangement or feature borrowed from pagan antiquity; and although these glorious piles have been woefully desecrated and shorn of more than half their original beauty, they yet produce stronger feelings of religious awe than their namesake at Rome, still in the zenith of its glory, with all its mosaics, gilding, and marbles. As an English author justly remarks, above thirty millions of Catholic money, gathered for the most part in the pointed cathedrals of' Christendom, have been lavished in the attempt to adapt classic details to a Christian church, the very idea of which implied a most degenerate spirit.

> St. Peter's, like other buildings of the same date and style, must convey to every Catholic mind the most melancholy associations,—it marks the fatal period of the great schism, and the outbreak of fearful heresy. England—once the brightest jewel in the crown of the Church— separated from Catholic unity; her most glorious churches dismantled, her religious dispersed, and clergy brought into bondage. France—the kingdom of the saintly Louis—overrun with Calvinists; her cathedrals pillaged, her abbeys given into the hands of lay rapacity, and the first seeds of the terrible revolution disseminated. Germany, Sweden, Holland, and a great part of the Low Countries, the same. For one religious house founded since that fatal period, five hundred have been dismantled and suppressed; for one canonized saint, we find a thousand professed infidels; for one country converted, six lost. These are some of the accompaniments of the grand renaissance, or revival of classic art, which moderns so highly extol in preference to the glorious works produced by the faith, zeal, and devotion of the Middle Ages; and such have been the results of the revived pagan system, which began with the classicism of the sixteenth century, was fostered in the mythological palaces of the Grand Monarque, and only attained its climax in the great French revolution, when its principles were fully worked out in the massacre of the clergy, the open profession of infidelity, and the exhibition of a prostitute raised over the altar of God.

[Anonymous No.20778963]

>>20778572
Atheist christlarpers really think they got something with this Marvel Thor thing huh?
Is this the consequence of forming your entire identity around a lie you inwardly reject?

[Anonymous No.20779010]

>>20777023
>Christian cope I'm afraid.

That's pretty much all of Christianity. It's cope, larp, cringe. The holy trinity

[Anonymous No.20779026]

>>20778963
It does annoy me that our pagan Gods somehow became intellectual property owned by Jews. The most recent Thor movie also has Zeus and they portray him as a fat retard. Imagine if someone created a movie with a mocking tribute to Shiva, Buddha, or the prophet Mohammad? There would be riots in the streets! Liberals seethe about cultural appropriation when white people were traditional outfits from other countries as costumes, but somehow it’s okay to mock European culture in film. It’s a joke. Still, Christians using this as a point against Christianity are kind of throwing stones in a glass house. Jews may own the rights to depict Thor and Zeus in cinema, but they literally wrote all of the Bible and Jesus was one of them. People who claim to be nationalist and anti-semitic but practice Christianity are extremely confused.

[A Pneumatic !zHiZwFUpHY No.20779032]

>>20775340
>Just as the Old Testament prepared the way of Christ for the Jews
"the way of the Christ" is just Hellenized Judaism. there is not a single original idea behind Christianity excluding ad-hoc continuity/legitimacy-copes. even Christian art and architecture is aesthetically redundant.

there is no point in believing a religion that has not a single original idea that is not taken from somewhere else.

[Anonymous No.20779046]

How Rabbi Paul tricked gentiles into worshipping Jews

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=e4NgyXQU0yg

[Anonymous No.20779056]

>>20777051
Historicity of Arthur is a topic that is so complicated that I won't even start. Let's However look at the literally material itself.
Everyone knows about Gawain and the Green Knight but much lesser known thing is that Gawain also follows certain story arcs that Georges Dumezil would classify as belonging to the warrior deity and that's in The Death of Arthur. The story arc goes more or less as follows - the warrior god breaks the norms of the 3 basic IE spheres of divine realm - law, war and life(which includes cultivation of land, fertility, intersex relationships and funeral rights alike) and gets some kind of punishment for it.
In The Death of Arthur Gawaine first refuses to accept surrender from the knight he fought and tries to cut his head off, but as he starts to swing a lady who was in love with said knight jumps in front of him so instead of killing the knight, Gawain kills a completely innocent person. He is then forced to wear her head as a medalion and her body in front of his saddle as he comes back to the court of Arthur. This is obviously his violation of the sphere of law and the punishment for it is a public shaming.
Afterwards he follows a certain lady who will lead him to adventures and they encounter a knight who lets 11 others defeat him and get captured. Gawain to disdain of said lady refuses to help him because he doesn't feel like he has the chances, in other words out of cowardice, which violates the sphere of war. Said lady leaves him as a punishment.
He then meets the knight that was beaten and learns from him that he does it every day because this is the only way he can get see a woman that he loves(and she hates him). Gawain offers his help with getting this woman, but instead he himself sleeps with her. This obviously violates the 3rd sphere and makes him an enemy for life

Obviously this story is obviously around 1000 years apart from any pagan form of it, but the fact that the general storyline was maintained, together with the fact that Gawain in general is a borderline supernatural being(his grandmother, Arthur's mother - Ingraine - has something to do with fairies) shows that there's still some paganism in even that late of a literally form.

Another Arthurian story that has connection with Irish, obviously pagan stories is that of Culhwch who seems to be replacement for Lugh but I don't care to give you detailed description as just as with the Green Knight it was done to death by others.

This wasn't uncommon in middle ages literature. The people who likely inspired the story of Siegfried were likely Frankish Christians, but Siegfried has some characterisation likening him to Odin and so does Hagen, meaning that the death of Siegfried may be understood as Odin sacrificing Odin to Odin(since the weapon of choice is a spear), which I haven't seen anyone else noticing and yet it's rather clear allusion to it.

[Anonymous No.20779104]

>>20775340
>>20776273
Ahahaha how did Paganism prepare Europeans for Christianity? Pagan morality is completely at odds with Christian morality.

[Anonymous No.20779146]

>>20779032
Not only this is absurd on the grounds that most philosophical schools arise from basically commentaries on previous currents, and that even in the field of religion you tons and tons of repetition in both metaphysics and mythology, but also in the fact that the Trinity exists, and alone the conception of Christ and the Incarnation do presents a substantial innovation over the hellenic schools prominent within christianity. This "christianity is just platonism but with Jesus" is nothing but the result of the most blatant ignorance.
>aesthethically redundant.
Please, point me towards any religion that alone created an aesthetic otherwhise separated from the cultures that came before and after. Even better: Explain to me why Gothic wouldn't count here?

[Anonymous No.20779150]

>>20779104
Because tipically in the understanding of Christianity pagan myths, and to some extend laws and traditions do either hint at the shadow of the Incarnation or preserve some semblance of the true moral law, or even deep insights into reality like greek philosophy. Obviously corrupted by either ignorance or demons, nevertheless that is how that stuff is normally explained. The veracity of that argument is another topic.

[Anonymous No.20779161]

>>20777023
>You don't see depictions of biblical scenes in pop culture

Several, if not most of the highest art pieces in the history of the west (specially during the Renaissance) are either biblical characters or scenes. I can't tell if you are baiting or just ignorant to a dangerous degree.

[Anonymous No.20779169]

>>20779150
You do realize both Christianity and Judaism have their own roots in middle eastern polytheism, right?

[Anonymous No.20779180]

>>20779104
Pic related is quite hilarious because nowhere but in the minds of 19th-20th century euros and americans the idea that the late empire in which christianity grew was this energetic, violent and wild pagan cosmos makes sense. The paganism of Jupiter and Herakles and the old gods of nature was already dying in favor of eastern mystery cults, some of which (and helped by the philosophical tendencies of the time) presented little difference from the christian morals save its justification. The ascetic world-weary character is almost universal in late-roman and greek faiths, not an imposition of the victimized yet victorious Christ.
Lastly, the fact that paganism was ultimately beaten (and not even after a millennia of struggle but just a few centuries) within Rome and then across Europe seems very strange if these so noble virtues, everlasting and victorious, were at the heart of those faiths. Sadly, as always, scholars with pagan leanings make gods both from mythologies and also from the peoples that believed said myths, turning them from men of flesh and bone to wild warriors that can only exist in dreams.

[Anonymous No.20779183]

>>20779169
The original post said that it is useless to believe in a religion with no original element on its own. To assume that christianity and judaism descended from middle eastern polytheism presupposes that both are false in the first place, which is a separated topic. I was explaining that both the Trinity and the Incarnation as seen in christianity are very big innovation, even more so with the platonic herency of the Church Fathers.

[Anonymous No.20779190]

>>20779169
Oh, sorry, got confused with your post. In that one I explain the traditional christian position about the issue of pagan faiths and morals: There is shadows of truth hinted throught tainted waters. The veracity of that claim, or the "development" of christianity and judaism is another topic.

[Anonymous No.20779232]

>>20778915
Based crypto-pagan masons conducting revolutions to scourge Evropa of judaic influence

[Anonymous No.20779242]

>>20778572
>>20778963
Honestly Christ seems like more of an "idol" than the pagan gods, his re-animated material corpse is hardly a transcendent celestial form

[Anonymous No.20779262]

>>20779242
>re-animated corpse.
Confirmed of never reading the Bible or christian theology. Christ's body is glorified after the resurrection and capable of things a fallen human body can't. Is the perfect model from which (in the world to come) the bodies of saints will be made.

[Anonymous No.20779323]

>>20779183
>the Trinity
The Father, Son and Holy Spirit = Good, Nous and Pneuma (World Soul).
The trinity is pure platonism.
>the Incarnation
Pagan gods were incarnated in men frequently, even a pagan contemporary of Jesus, Apollonius of Tyana was thought to be an incarnation of the god Proteus.

Neither were big innovations at all.

[Anonymous No.20779333]

>>20779262
>In Platonic philosophy and other Greek philosophical thought, at death the soul was said to leave the inferior body behind. The idea that Jesus was resurrected spiritually rather than physically even gained popularity among some Christian teachers, whom the author of 1 John declared to be antichrists. Similar beliefs appeared in the early church as Gnosticism. However, in Luke 24:39, the resurrected Jesus expressly states "behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Handle me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see, I have."

Sounds like a material resurrection to me, an explicit rejection of the spiritual.

[Anonymous No.20779337]

>>20777596
>implying Islam isn't a pagan religion

[Anonymous No.20779355]

>>20779323
>The Father, Son and Holy Spirit = Good, Nous and Pneuma (World Soul).
Not how it works or is even explained in either eastern or western christianity. The Trinity is in no way on form parts to form some kind of completeness.
>Pagan gods were incarnated in men frequently
Which is different from kind incarnation because He is meant to become the archetype and redeemer of humanity. Men becoming the image of God throught Christ that is the manifestation of the Father is a big theme within christian thought and the justification for sainthood, the participation in the (created if you are a cath or increated and co-eternal if you are ortho) energies of God. Christ incarnation is not just "a god coming down", but lies at the heart of the christian cosmology as an event of universal scale.

[Anonymous No.20779357]

>>20777503
Pagans start popping out of the woodwork after religious freedom has already been granted? Honestly, not very impressive and shows the lack devotion inherent in paganism. Why not before? Why didn’t they decide to suffer martyrdom by exposing themselves instead like Christians did? As Samuel Johnson explains

> MAYO. ‘I am of opinion, Sir, that every man is entitled to liberty of conscience in religion; and that the magistrate cannot restrain that right.’ JOHNSON. ‘Sir, I agree with you. Every man has a right to liberty of conscience, and with that the magistrate cannot interfere. People confound liberty of thinking with liberty of talking; nay, with liberty of preaching. Every man has a physical right to think as he pleases; for it cannot be discovered how he thinks. He has not a moral right; for he ought to inform himself, and think justly. But, Sir, no member of a society has a right to teach any doctrine contrary to what that society holds to be true. The magistrate, I say, may be wrong in what he thinks: but, while he thinks himself right, he may and ought to enforce what he thinks.’ MAYO. ‘Then, Sir, we are to remain always in errour, and truth never can prevail; and the magistrate was right in persecuting the first Christians.’ JOHNSON. ‘Sir, the only method by which religious truth can be established is by martyrdom. The magistrate has a right to enforce what he thinks; and he who is conscious the truth has a right to suffer. I am afraid there is no other way of ascertaining the truth, but by persecution on the one hand and enduring it on the other.’

By this standard, paganism has proven itself to be a false religion.

[Anonymous No.20779362]

>>20779333
>Sounds like a material resurrection to me, an explicit rejection of the spiritual.
There is no rejection of either the spirit of the flesh: In christianity both were created by God and, in principle, flesh was no lower than spirit. The redemption of matter and flesh and the restoration of humanity to its original (but now even more glorious) perfection is key here. The assumption that all matter is now evil or inferior is a gnostic trap sadly many christians fall in.

[Anonymous No.20779366]

>>20779232
I don’t know. Judaic influence in Europe in the 21st century is now stronger than it has ever been lol

[Anonymous No.20779370]

>>20779362
>The assumption that all matter is now evil or inferior is a gnostic trap sadly many christians fall in.

Yeah. For some reason people still think hatred and disgust of the body is a Christian thing even though it’s a gnostic thing. The New Testament describes the human body as a temple

> “Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.” 1 Corinthians 6:19-20

[Anonymous No.20779380]

>>20779357
>The only way to establish a valid cult is through the hierarchy of oppression
By this standard George Floyd the Martyr is a prophet of divine origin - Christian bolshevism reveals itself once again.

[Anonymous No.20779386]

>>20779370
Even as a protestant, one has to recognize that our separation from (the clearly corrupt) Rome brought also general ignorance regarding both the early christians doctrines and the heresies it battled. Many christians who end up spousing almost completely gnostic worldviews can be completely unaware for most of their lives.

[Anonymous No.20779393]

>>20779380
Not him but this is just a perverted twist of what it was actually said. There is no hierarchy of oppression at all: Martyrdom is a fairly good test for true belief because few would dare to die for a cause they don't deeply put their own faith in. Religions that survive martyrdom usually become far more stronger, influential and powerful than those that break apart at any sight of opression or cruelty.

[Anonymous No.20779402]

>>20779366
Jews only gained their current power through their unique ethno-centrism and their monopoly on international finance, both handed to them on a platter by the Christianity psyop.

>Thou goyim shalt not do banking, only the Jews may enslave with usury
>Thou shalt not practice triablism, we are all equals, except the Jews who are better than us

The latest attempted zionist controlled op is their "Christian Nationalism" which enshrines these two core principles thus making it wholly kosher and acceptable for the system.

Jews want you worshiping them and following their rules. Most moderns do so in a secular capacity but the Christian psyop is still chugging along nicely to sweep up all the rightoids.

[Anonymous No.20779405]

>>20779380
> Muh George Floyd!!

Kys Amerimutt

If you’re not willing to die or even be persecuted for your faith then that says all that needs to be said about the truth of your “faith”

[Anonymous No.20779406]

>kike worshipers manage to completely de-rail another thread that has nothing to do with them

[Anonymous No.20779416]

>>20779402
>Thou goyim shalt not do banking, only the Jews may enslave with usury
>Thou shalt not practice triablism, we are all equals, except the Jews who are better than us

Your kind keeps repeating this again and again yet in actual practice not a single Church Father, actually held that jews were somehow superior to gentiles, that all races ought to be mixed, or that usury from the part of hebrews was good. Neither the actual medieval chronicles portrait jews favorably nor benefiting from some holy arrangement.
You are projecting modern american baptist attitudes into historical christianity, and worse, assuming that such thing as a millennia long plan using christianity, a faith that ended up causing indirectly several massacres against jews and countless expulsions, as a psyop makes sense.

[Anonymous No.20779423]

>>20779416
>Noooo, nooo, Jews actually hate us worshiping them and giving them a monopoly on international finance
Such pure delusion is kekworthy

[Anonymous No.20779435]

All the greatest European minds embraced the least Abrahamic esoteric practices available to them at the time - Alchemy, Neo-Platonism, Pythagoreanism, Hermeticism, Classical Philosophy etc

Why is this?

[Anonymous No.20779444]

>>20779423
>Expelled from England in 1290
>The People's Crusade.
>The Shepherd's Crusade.
>Expulsions from Spain in 1492
>From Portugal in 1496
>From Paris in 1182 and several more in France.
>Forbade from holding public offices in Toulouse after the Albigensian Crusade.
>And even more and more just from Wikipedia.
Not that I hope to change your opinion: The crazed narrative you formed around this ethno-obsessed worldview completely uncaring for actual truth requires the fantasy of a conspiracy between christians and jews to be true. Still, maybe is not too late.

[Anonymous No.20779459]

>>20779026
What’s now wrong with portraying the Gods in that way for neopagans? The genuine pagan poets portrayed them no more respectfully to be honest as Samuel Johnson notes

> Mr. Murray praised the ancient philosophers for the candour and good humour with which those of different sects disputed with each other. JOHNSON. ‘sir, they disputed with good humour, because they were not in earnest as to religion. Had the ancients been serious in their belief, we should not have had their Gods exhibited in the manner we find them represented in the Poets. The people would not have suffered it. They disputed with good humour upon their fanciful theories, because they were not interested in the truth of them: when a man has nothing to lose, he may be in good humour with his opponent. Accordingly you see in Lucian, the Epicurean, who argues only negatively, keeps his temper; the Stoick, who has something positive to preserve, grows angry. Being angry with one who controverts an opinion which you value, is a necessary consequence of the uneasiness which you feel. Every man who attacks my belief, diminishes in some degree my confidence in it, and therefore makes me uneasy; and I am angry with him who makes me uneasy. Those only who believed in revelation have been angry at having their faith called in question; because they only had something upon which they could rest as matter of fact.

[Anonymous No.20779676]

>>20776956
>>20776963
>The Birth of Venus
>Often said to epitomize for modern viewers the spirit of the Renaissance
>Totally not pagan bro

[Anonymous No.20779807]

>>20778572
/thread

[Anonymous No.20779816]

Paganism in the current day is a glorified and extremely academic atheism. I highly doubt you believe in Odin, Zeus or Perun

[Anonymous No.20779820]

>>20779676
Painted by a Catholic who at various points was commissioned by the Pope and worked on the Sistine Chapel and painted tons of Christian paintings btw

[Anonymous No.20779886]

>>20779816
Spoiler alert: the polytheistic 'believing' is not the same thing as the monotheistic 'believing', try again

[Anonymous No.20779890]

>>20779820
And your point is...?

[Anonymous No.20779898]

>>20779890
It’s not ‘le ebin pagan’

[Anonymous No.20779905]

>>20779898
Yes it is, because there's nothing intrinsically wrong with being polytheistic and appreciating the noble parts of Christianity. However, the opposite doesn't apply

[Anonymous No.20780119]

>>20779816
I unironically believe in the Gods as necessary henads in the chain of being between the One and the multiplicity

This is also what Pletho and even arguably Ficino believed

>Up to 1489, Ficino had almost exclusively singled out pagan works to translate and comment. For Ficino, it appears that the commentary as a literary form allowed him to say things which he believed but which he could not as a Christian, and latterly as a priest, have said in propria persona. But the authorities saw through the smoke-screen and understood the voice to be his own. Ficino was so sincerely enamored of daemons as to take this risk, I conjecture, because of another and subtler scruple: one that was partly Christian, partly Neoplatonic. Ficino also felt worried or guilty about invoking, and thus seeming to worship, supercelestial gods.

>True, Ficino like many other astrologers regarded the heavenly bodies as living beings with Olympian names (see "Habits"); and like many other Neoplatonists he called metaphysical principles gods (for example, the seminal reasons in 3.26, OF., p. 57 1).

>When Ficino goes about to list the errors of certain pagans, he castigates not polytheism but lack of due subordination of such beings to the one God.24 Nevertheless, we do know that, for her part, the Church through her self-appointed spokesmen, such as the Byzantine George Scholarios and the Roman George of Trebizond, had persecuted the Byzantine Platonist Gemisthus Pletho because he allegedly believed in and revived the worship of, among others, the supercelestial gods. Ficino would have at the same time known of Pletho's fate and yet sympathized with him and agreed with his reasoning. Pletho's religion, as well as its precursors, the theurgy of Iamblichus and especially of the Chaldean Oracles (of which more below), would have attracted Ficino as a poet but repelled him as a Christian and distracted him as a physician.

1/2

[Anonymous No.20780124]

>>20780119
>Supercelestial gods, like daemons, filled another link in the Chain of Being, albeit a very exalted one; and Pletho's reasoning about them may help to explain their seductive appeal. According to Pletho, following Proclus (ET, Prop. no. 113), the Neoplatonic principles of continuity and gradation or insertion of mediators into a hierarchy demanded that right under the One God there should be many partial gods of one sort or another to mediate this world's diversity. Both Pletho and Proclus, Masai explains, are engaging the problem of the one and the many, explaining how a world so diverse as ours could arise from a creator who is the One, by postulating subordinate gods responsible each for a different segment of it.

>It is because of such sympathy, I propose, that Ficino does occasionally allude to these supercelestial gods. He means in particular the intelligibles of Proclus. Ficino vacillates about them as agents of his magic somewhat as he does about the daemons, though for reasons we will examine below, he usually disavows direct access to them, whereas he usually, by stated preference, endorses the daemons. In 3.15, doubtless thinking of Pletho's troubles, he leaves the question to others whether the supercelestials can be attracted through the celestials (Op., p. 552, see also 3.1, p. 531, mentioned below, and 3.13, p. 549).

>In 3.22, however, in pursuance of his orthodox and, as I have argued, whole-hearted belief in free will, he more boldly and centrally invokes the supercelestial gods despite their idolatrous implications: the supercelestial divinities can be induced by the patient's direct emotional or deliberate contact with them to free him from the very fate to which their supposed agents - the mundane, planetary gods and their attendant daemons- have bound him through astrological causation (Op., pp. 565-66). This proves that Ficino believed, contrary to what he says elsewhere, that they could be invoked directly, not only without the celestial gods but in opposition to them.

2/2

[Anonymous No.20780193]

>>20779180
You have no idea what you're talking about

[Anonymous No.20780205]

>In summary, consider that those who by prayer, by study, by manner of life, and by conduct imitate the beneficence, action, and order of the celestials, since they are more similar to the gods, receive fuller gifts from them.

- Marsilio Ficino

This statement is pretty pagan fellas.

[Anonymous No.20780243]

>>20779898
Read the Pagan Mysteries in the Renaissance by Edgar Wind you pseud.

[Anonymous No.20780248]

>>20780243
>Wind was born in Berlin, Germany, one of the two children of Maurice Delmar Wind, an Argentinian merchant of Russian Jewish ancestry, and his Romanian wife Laura Szilard.[

[Anonymous No.20780286]

>>20780248
>Jesus was born in Palestine, son of a YHWH, a volcano demon of Jewish ancestry, and his Jewish wife Mary

[Anonymous No.20780387]

>>20779676
Sandro Botticelli is the worst example you could give. He was literally a follower of the Christian extremist Savonarola.

[Anonymous No.20780390]

>>20779905
>there's nothing intrinsically wrong with being polytheistic
Read Romans 1 and look at our society today. Degeneracy and relativism is the natural result of polytheism and idolatry.

[Anonymous No.20780451]

ITT: Seething Christcucks and Jews

[Anonymous No.20780565]

>>20779886
Lol yeah sure. You can sacrifice a lamb for your tree goddess and she'll cure your erectile dysfunction but that's it. You'll never know truth until you surrender your soul to Christ.

[Anonymous No.20780738]

>>20780565
I've literally never heard on any of that, and you just further demonstrate that monotheists have to lie to keep their embarrasing theological system afloat

[Anonymous No.20780742]

>>20780390
Read Matthew 19:21 and give me your house

[Anonymous No.20780875]

>>20780742
Meme argument. If we read this in context, first Jesus tells the man to simply follow the commandments if he wants to inherit eternal life, but then the man presses him again, asking what he still lacks—then Jesus tells him to take an even further step towards perfection. The man balks, his heart, it turns out, is still attached to material things before God. It is hard for such a person to enter heaven with such attachments, but not altogether impossible, for as Christ says in this very section, all things are possible with God. If you were to read Matthew 13:8, you will notice that there are different levels of reward—one hundred, sixty, thirty-fold reward. The section you are quoting against me is a hundred-fold reward. Even those with a lesser reward will be saved.

[Anonymous No.20780882]

>>20780875
In that case, I'll also read Romans 1 in its context, and conclude that it doesn't apply to me either

[Anonymous No.20780899]

>>20780882
Romans 1 deals with forgetting the immortal and omnipotent God who is clear from the things that are created, giving us no excuse before God, and regardless indulging in rebellion, giving ourselves up to degrading passions and lusts, the result of which is evident in our society today which celebrates sodomy, transgenderism, materialism and sins of all varieties. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.

[Anonymous No.20780910]

>>20780899
Yeah okay, so in other words, if it benefits you it's literally true, and if it doesn't it needs to be reinterpreted 4 billion times into a metacontextual metaphor and you don't need to care for it even slightly. Way to expose yourself. This is why nobody likes you people

[Anonymous No.20780919]

>>20780910
I’m not sure what your point is. What Romans 1 describes is literally true, as is the quote that you threw at me from Matthew, which was a poor attempt at a gotcha, which I then took the time to contextualize and to show you that Christians are not compelled to sell everything they own in order to be saved, as taught by Christ himself.

[Anonymous No.20780953]

>>20780919
My point is that the only meaningful difference between Romans 1 and Matthew 19:21 is that you personally benefit from Romans 1 and don't from Matthew 19:21, and that whether you benefit clearly influences how you interpret your infallible holy book. You interpret it something like this:

>verse that you benefit from
>100% true, and why should even discuss a single letter about this? Direct verse from the mouth of God Himself, must be followed to the letter and may never be even slightly questioned
>verse you don't benefit from
>acksually, this verse's parralel sustratum of the intertexual cultural context tells me that this verse means the very opposite of what it says, due to the space-time re-re-revision of the theological upperbound of its downward hermeneutical sub-superstructure, and all of this means this verse definitely isn't true, and I don't need to do any of the stuff it says

In other words, you're a bad faith larper, and no one will ever consider your 'faith' sincere, or you as a person genuine

[Anonymous No.20780971]

>>20780953
Your entire argument is a strawman. It is absolutely true that those who leave and sell the things they have for Christ will reap greater rewards than others. This was never denied, except for you attempted to snidely claim it was obligatory on me, when it is not. Maybe that signifies that I ought to be less attached to the items that I own—it might, be regardless, your entire line of argument is atheist arguing tactics and strawmanning. Go play with your Thor funkopops

[Anonymous No.20781023]

>>20780971
No, you're just a bullshit artist. Why is none of this metaphor context re-re-reinterpretation shit suddenly not relevant when it comes to Romans 1? The only difference between the two verses, like I said before, is whether you personally benefit from them. None of these mental gymnastics are relevant when it concerns a verse that you benefit from, but then a verse comes along that you don't benefit from, and behold, out come flying a million excuses of why you don't actually need to do this.

This is also the true meaning of 'larper'. You don't accept the downside of your beliefs. Why not just admit you're not a Christian, but an atheist with a cathedral fetish

[Anonymous No.20781170]

>>20780742
> give me your house

Coveting is a sin. Read 10 commandments.

[Anonymous No.20781351]

>>20780971
>"Christianity has emptied Valhalla, felled the sacred groves, extirpated the national imagery as a shameful superstition, as a devilish poison, and given us instead the imagery of a nation whose climate, laws, culture, and interests are strange to us and whose history has no connection whatever with our own." — German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1795)

Refute Hegel. You won't.

[Anonymous No.20781398]

>>20781351
Hegel calls you a pagan larper. Refute him.

> Others, trying to give the Germans an imagery of their own once more, an imagery that was home-grown, cried: “Is Achaea, then, the Teutons’ fatherland?” But this imagery is not that of Germans today. The project of restoring to a nation an imagery once lost was always doomed to failure; and on the whole it was bound to be even less fortunate than Julian’s attempt to inculcate the mythology of his forefathers into his contemporaries in its old strength and universality. The outcome of that attempt was to all appearance far more promising because at that date much of the old mythology was still left in men’s hearts and because the Emperor had plenty of means at his command for giving it pre-eminence. The old German imagery has nothing in our day to connect or adapt itself to; it stands as cut off from the whole circle of our ideas, opinions, and beliefs, and is as strange to us as the imagery of Ossian or of India.

[Anonymous No.20781425]

>>20781398
The events of the 20th century would contradict this somewhat

[Anonymous No.20781431]

>>20781398
>>20781425
pic related

[Anonymous No.20781692]

>>20781431
Romanticism doesn’t discredit what Hegel said

[Anonymous No.20781751]

>>20781431
The other problem was that Hegel wasn’t a fan of German myths themselves. Thought they were kind of shit in comparison to the Greek ones.

[Anonymous No.20782385]

>>20781398
Why would anyone care what Hegel thought? Napoleon lost.

>>20780565
>oh yeah? well the talmud says-
Why would anyone care what the Talmsays?