/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21474981]

hate it or love it, you cnn't deny that it's the most influenctial book of the 21st century

[Anonymous No.21474982]

>>21474981
If you're a redditor perhaps.

[Anonymous No.21474987]

>>21474981
Far from. The 21st century is not even half way done and that pop-social book is not particularly relevant in 2023.

[Anonymous No.21475239]

This book was ever relevant?

[Anonymous No.21475332]

>>21474982
Being a tradlarper is the new Reddit thing.

[Anonymous No.21475340]

>>21475332
I suppose you're one of the people who calls everything they don't like larping.

[Anonymous No.21475345]

Dawkins had no idea of the world at large, I think. He's a hopeless optimist, so he expected everyone to hold hands and agree on the validity of science.
It's kind of hilarious how out of touch he is. I can't really hate him. It helps he's an actual scientist and not a daytime cartoon figure like Magic Negro and Bill Nye.

[Anonymous No.21475349]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N83tLOw7Zvk

[Anonymous No.21475372]

>>21474982
What does that even mean?

[Anonymous No.21475375]

>>21474981
It has the philosophical depth of a puddle of piss. Its godcuck counterpart is Mere Christianity, another puddle of piss.

[Anonymous No.21475379]

>>21475372
It's influential to reddit

[Anonymous No.21475392]

>>21475332
Good, I look forward to the pendulum swing so that Dawkins can die bitter that he got cucked by Muslims AND Catholics. I hate the guy on a personal level because of how he talks and his physiognomy.

I've got my esoteric Hinduism stuff over here. Have fun with your catboy catholics.

[Anonymous No.21475400]

>>21474981
It will make a big comeback in ~5 years when Catholicism gets ultra-cucked after the ongoing Synod and the e-Christian larp gets boring.

[Anonymous No.21475401]

>>21475400
>e-Christian larp
what are you anon?

[Anonymous No.21475407]

>>21475401
I'm a Christian but mostly because I think the risk is too high it could be true to not practice (so basically a fraud kek). e-Christians are even bigger frauds than me who only "believe" because they associate it with conservatism.

[Anonymous No.21475414]

>>21475407
You're literally only a "christian" because of pascal's wager and you call other people larpers?

[Anonymous No.21475435]

>>21475414
I never denied that I'm a fraud, but at least there's a mathematical rationale for it - it seemed like the highest risk out of the world's religons (Islam seems unlikely, Judaism is an ethnoreligion, Eastern religions you go to a naraka or something which is at least finite, etc.). Becoming a Christian because of conservatism makes even less sense because the whole spirit of Christianity goes against it, IMO - there's a reason why the Church always moves in a more egalitarian direction over very long timeframes. They can't see which way the wind is blowing.

[Anonymous No.21475447]

>>21474981

Nah, new atheism got replaced by the thinly repackaged Christianity of the equality cult.

[Anonymous No.21475450]

>>21475435
How is becoming a Christian out of conservatism bad? That is one of the most logical reasons to become a Christian in the modern era as it's a bastion of sanity compared to the decaying degenerate milleu all around. There was a saint who said he didn't care if the only reason you started going to church is because you liked a girl, as long as you stayed.
>The Church
Which one lmao, the Orthodox church certainly isn't moving in a modernist direction.

[Anonymous No.21475480]

>>21475435
The egalitarianism you speak of in Christianity is the result of worldly influence on church communities.
In short, churches are forsaking scripture in order to appeal to worldly values, in the hope that it will attract members. Not so coincidentally, many of these churches are corrupt and have a lot of money changing hands behind the scenes.

It is not “normal” for things to become more “progressive.” The whig theory of history is bunk.

[Anonymous No.21475491]

>>21474981
yes surely the whites who were literally called "Sky People" evolved from gorillas

[Anonymous No.21475490]

>>21475450
>How is becoming a Christian out of conservatism bad?
The vast majority of conservative Christians ignore all of Christian moral teaching except teachings regarding sexual morality, which they tend to ignore in practice, too.

>That is one of the most logical reasons to become a Christian in the modern era as it's a bastion of sanity compared to the decaying degenerate milleu all around.
See above. Not accusing you of ignoring Catholic sexual morality personally, assuming you're a conservative Christian yourself. I fundamentally disagree with the quoted proposition, though - in many ways I think socialists and Communists have a far better command of most of Christian ethics (modulo sexual morality, granted). Catholics and Protestants used to be at each other's throats, but after Vatican II relations warmed considerably and people got over it - in the future, I think it's very likely that the same will happen with Western Christianity and Socialism. The current Synod at the Vatican does seem to be signalling another shift leftward coming in the near future.

>Which one lmao, the Orthodox church certainly isn't moving in a modernist direction.
I practice Catholicism as of now because it's what I was raised in as a kid, path of least resistance and I can't investigate every denomination. If some obscure Protestnat sect ends up being correct, well, what can you do? Plus, I'm not a Slav, Greek, etc. so I can't *really* become Orthodox as a practical matter, I'd be even more of a fraud than I already am. Though I unironically might change over if the Church decides that it condones gay marriage or something, that'd be a ridiculous doctrinal shift.

[Anonymous No.21475516]

>>21475379
How much brainrot do you have?

[Anonymous No.21475521]

>>21474981
I want to read Dawkins not because of Le Fedora but because the quotes I've seen from him are thoughtful and well composed

[Anonymous No.21475524]

>>21475480
>The egalitarianism you speak of in Christianity is the result of worldly influence on church communities.
What I'm saying is that for at least a few centuries now, worldly ethics at a given time are approximately Christian ethics at a future time, Christianity lags worldly ethics.

>It is not “normal” for things to become more “progressive.” The whig theory of history is bunk.
I'm only talking about the trend of the last few hundred years at most.

[Anonymous No.21475525]

>>21475407
>>21475435
This sounds an awful lot like projection my dude.

[Anonymous No.21475528]

>>21475490
>The vast majority of conservative Christians ignore all of Christian moral teaching
What moral teachings do conservative Christians tend to ignore?
>in many ways I think socialists and Communists have a far better command of most of Christian ethics
How? They're all atheists who constantly persecute Christians. Their entire rhetoric about helping the poor is just a cover for their lust for power.
>The current Synod at the Vatican does seem to be signalling another shift leftward coming in the near future.
The Roman Catholic Church has been spiritually subverted for 1,000 years, politically subverted for about 100.
>I practice Catholicism as of now because it's what I was raised in as a kid
Truth is based around what you grew up with?
>If some obscure Protestnat sect ends up being correct, well, what can you do?
If you disprove Sola Scriptura you disprove every protestant denomination, not to mention the lack of apostolic succession.
>Plus, I'm not a Slav, Greek, etc. so I can't *really* become Orthodox as a practical matter, I'd be even more of a fraud than I already am.
This is something that Catholics say but I've never seen it happen in pratice, I know a Turk who was welcomed at a Serbian parish.

[Anonymous No.21475565]

>>21475450
> How is becoming a Christian out of conservatism bad?
Tradcucks entire personality can be summarised to “a 6 year old asking questions”, except they’re grown ups

[Anonymous No.21475569]

>>21475332
>Being a tradlarper is the new Reddit thing.

[Anonymous No.21475572]

>>21475528
>What moral teachings do conservative Christians tend to ignore?
Basically everything that involves the treatment of the poor. I think a lot of leftist efforts are counterproductive for easily explained reasons and often motivated by a combination of resentment and outrage at injustice, but they're at least trying.

>How? They're all atheists who constantly persecute Christians. Their entire rhetoric about helping the poor is just a cover for their lust for power.
I think they genuinely want to help the poor, but they're *also* motivated by extreme resentment of the wealthy, and on top, of that Communism is fundamentally harmful and would be a disaster even implemented by the most well-intentioned.

>The Roman Catholic Church has been spiritually subverted for 1,000 years, politically subverted for about 100.
Ok so you're Orthodox.

>Truth is based around what you grew up with?
I can't investigate every denomination.

>If you disprove Sola Scriptura you disprove every protestant denomination, not to mention the lack of apostolic succession.
Sola Scriptura isn't looking so bad right now, have you SEEN what's coming out of the Vatican recently? Pic related btw. At least the intellectually honest Sola people would be able to tell you the problems with this.

[Anonymous No.21475571]

>>21475565
what do you mean?

[Anonymous No.21475617]

>>21475572
>Basically everything that involves the treatment of the poor.
What are you basing this on? I keep hearing this shit all the time, but Christians in my country are majority conservative, yet they are always first to help refugees, do charity and vote for welfare. From other countries too, I always see conservative Christians endorse helping the poor(more on personal level than govermental, I admit.) So where does this meme of conservative Christians ignoring the poor come from?

[Anonymous No.21475621]

>>21475572
>Basically everything that involves the treatment of the poor. I think a lot of leftist efforts are counterproductive for easily explained reasons and often motivated by a combination of resentment and outrage at injustice, but they're at least trying.
As someone who was involved in the leftist sphere, they don't really have any goodwill in them, they're motivated entirely by resentment
>I think they genuinely want to help the poor, but they're *also* motivated by extreme resentment of the wealthy, and on top, of that Communism is fundamentally harmful and would be a disaster even implemented by the most well-intentioned.
Communism from it's start has been a subversive ideology designed around attacking church and throne to make way for a centralized economically controlled state. (Capitalism and Fascism are the same)
>Ok so you're Orthodox.
I'm just an inquirer who has no prior history with Christianity and they're the most consistent option, they're the only ones who resemble the ancient church.
>I can't investigate every denomination.
You don't have to, you can disprove all forms of Protestantism by attacking their shared presuppositions.
>Sola Scriptura isn't looking so bad right now, have you SEEN what's coming out of the Vatican recently? Pic related btw. At least the intellectually honest Sola people would be able to tell you the problems with this.
Protestants have the exact same problems with homosexual leftie stuff you won't find any improvement there. The problem with Sola Scriptura is it just leads to everyone interpreting the bible to mean whatever they want it to say thus leading to the aforementioned 10,000 denominations.

[Anonymous No.21475630]

>>21475490
>I think socialists and Communists have a far better command of most of Christian ethics
Kek, you dont know many leftists do you?

[Anonymous No.21475638]

>>21475407
This isn't what faith is. You've embarrassed yourself by writing this, please do not call yourself a Christian.

[Anonymous No.21475642]

>>21475638
Also, to add, I will pray for you and suggest you do the same.

[Anonymous No.21475645]

>>21475571
Case in point

[Anonymous No.21475651]

>>21475617
Voting for welfare isn't actually really that good, as charity is an act of will, if you force everyone to pay taxes through threat of violence to them it's not really an act of charity.

If you're from a European country I can't say it's moral to support "refugees" since they're not actually refugees (4/5 of the Arabs in Sweden regularly visit their home country) and you're turning a blind eye to all the people they murder and rape.

[Anonymous No.21475669]

>>21475617
Maybe it's because I live in the US, not sure where you're from. Conservative Christianity is overwhelmingly associated with libertarianism here.

>>21475621
>As someone who was involved in the leftist sphere, they don't really have any goodwill in them, they're motivated entirely by resentment
I live in left-liberal central so I have to interact with them a lot, most of them seem decent enough in character. Not denying the element of resentfulness here btw, just think that said resentment is often also accompanied by or rooted in an outrage at a perceived injustice.

>Protestants have the exact same problems with homosexual leftie stuff you won't find any improvement there.
True in many cases. The Episcopal Church in particular is a running joke here.


>The problem with Sola Scriptura is it just leads to everyone interpreting the bible to mean whatever they want it to say thus leading to the aforementioned 10,000 denominations.
It's easy to say that until you Develop Doctrine in questionable directions, but I guess your counterargument here would be that Catholicism is false so obviously they would end up at wrong doctrinal points.

>>21475638
I genuinely try to live according to Christian ethics to the best of my ability.

>>21475651
Before his Papacy, Benedict XVI claimed that "In many respects, democratic socialism was and is close to Catholic social doctrine". Francis has associated himself with a fair number of Liberation Theology types. I don't think it's that cut and dry.

[Anonymous No.21475684]

>>21475651
By support I meant giving them food and clothes, while they are under the custody of authorities, not smuggling them in or anything. And while I agree welfare is not necessarily good, its what is usually used for criticizing them. I am not even Christian, its just annoying seeing everyone attack the few Christians who actually seem to believe their religion.

[Anonymous No.21475698]

>>21475669
>It's easy to say that until you Develop Doctrine in questionable directions, but I guess your counterargument here would be that Catholicism is false so obviously they would end up at wrong doctrinal points.
Well the difference is the Orthodox don't develop doctrine, one of their primary criticisms of the Catholic church is that their doctrine changes. Father Seraphim Rose (An American convert btw) points out how the perfect Catholic from 300 years ago would be excommunicated if he time traveled to today.
>Before his Papacy, Benedict XVI claimed that "In many respects, democratic socialism was and is close to Catholic social doctrine". Francis has associated himself with a fair number of Liberation Theology types. I don't think it's that cut and dry.
Ratzinger also prayed in a mosque towards Mecca and Bergoglio defends Pachamama idols, both of these are acts of apostasy. I wouldn't take them as authorities on Christianity desu, they openly break the commandment not to worship other gods.

[Anonymous No.21475737]

>>21475621
Whats your opinion on Orthodox teaching on divorce? That one always seemed to me to be strong point against their legitimacy.

[Anonymous No.21475752]

>>21475737
I haven't looked too much into it, but they don't seem to take it lightly like a lot of Catholics imply they do. You can only do it 3 times and it's always seen as a bad, horrible thing to be avoided. I think it's really just a way to be honest instead of going through the whole anullment cope that Catholics do. But I'm in no way an authority or even knowledgable on this.

[Anonymous No.21475773]

>>21474987
It's 2021 buddy

[Anonymous No.21475793]

>>21475698
>Father Seraphim Rose (An American convert btw) points out how the perfect Catholic from 300 years ago would be excommunicated if he time traveled to today.
Where does he say this? Sounds interesting.

[Anonymous No.21475809]

>>21475345
Didn't he complain about some author winning the Nobel Prize in Literature because the book wasn't sciency enough?

[Anonymous No.21475820]

>>21474981
I honestly forgot this guy existed for a year or so until you made this thread. Like it or hate it, it's just another pop philosophy book.

[Anonymous No.21475822]

>>21475698
>>21475793
I got Father Seraphim Rose mixed up with Father Andrew Stephen Damick, my bad. It's from his book Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy.
>The Roman Catholic faith is not “backwards compatible”… which means that a “good Catholic” from two hundred years ago could be in danger of excommunication were he alive today. For example, papal infallibility was denied by many Catholics, including bishops, until the official definition of the dogma in 1870 at the First Vatican Council. They all remained “good Catholics” before 1870. Now they would be excommunicated and under the anathema of the First Vatican Council.

[Anonymous No.21475835]

>>21475822
It seemingly never occurred to the proponents of Papal Infalibility that it could hypothetically be used to legitimize Modernism.

[Anonymous No.21475839]

>>21475835
The irony is that the defenders of Papal infallibility back then were traditionalists and Papal fallibility was the "liberal" position.

[Anonymous No.21475851]

>>21475638
It confuses me to no end that people will go to church or call themselves Christian when they don’t believe in God. What do they even do? What is their purpose? Are they just afraid, I don’t get it.

[Anonymous No.21475861]

>>21475851
>What is their purpose? Are they just afraid, I don’t get it.
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, as the Proverb goes. Downside risk to not at least trying to practice Christianity is infinite if Christianity is true. Of course, the same could be said of many major religions, but as I said above, Islam, Judaism etc. seem less likely to be true to me.

[Anonymous No.21475871]

>>21475450
You should only be a Christian because you think the Christian God exists.

[Anonymous No.21475873]

>>21475851
Most people dont really care all that much. They barely know anything about their faith and just do it because they were born into it and consider it part of their identity. The very concept of "cradle Catholic" is ridiculous since Christianity is not ethnic faith and its really doesnt matter if you were born into it. Funny thing is, those types are usually the one who call others larpers.

[Anonymous No.21475881]

>>21475871
People are convinced of Christianity and the Holy Trinity BECAUSE of it's conservatism, that's what I'm trying to get at.

[Anonymous No.21475884]

>>21475873
>I go to church once a year but these converts are larpers interrupting muh social club

[Anonymous No.21475928]

>>21475528
>What moral teachings do conservative Christians tend to ignore?
Conservative Christians tend to think of moral issues as political ones. When I was at my sister's place for Christmas, she said she was disappointed about the reversal of Roe v. Wade because that would mean the Republicans would lose next election. I flipped my sh*t when I heard that. Unrelated to the morals -> politics, many are are stingy when it comes to charity. I know some people who said they wouldn't give money to a homeless guy on the side of the road because they heard a few stories where grifters dress as hobos to have people give them money, and those grifters earn from panhandling that they were able to buy mansions.
>>21475490
>Plus, I'm not a Slav, Greek, etc. so I can't *really* become Orthodox as a practical matter, I'd be even more of a fraud than I already am.
That's a meme. The church I go to is multi-ethnic and I am welcomed by everyone there. The liturgy is in English, and we sing the Lord's Prayer in English and then chant it in Greek, Slavonic, Arabic, and Ukrainian.

[Anonymous No.21475954]

>>21475809
Like I said, out of touch. The dude doesn't know anything out of his academic frame of reference.

[Anonymous No.21475955]

>>21475928
>she said she was disappointed about the reversal of Roe v. Wade because that would mean the Republicans would lose next election.
That's ironic, people (usually liberals) say that Christians shouldn't care about abortion because that's a "political issue" rather than a "moral/religious issue" (implying there's a hard distinction in the first place)
>I know some people who said they wouldn't give money to a homeless guy on the side of the road because they heard a few stories where grifters dress as hobos to have people give them money, and those grifters earn from panhandling that they were able to buy mansions.
That does exist but it would still be better to take that chance IMO, now the real scam is donating to international "charities" and NGOs which are always scams or coverups for some really messed up stuff.

[Anonymous No.21475958]

>>21475617
Some Christians are ok in this regard, but when I look at the /pol/ larpers it's certainly not the case. Those kinds of people genuinely claim that Donald Trump, a divorced, greedy billionaire is the incarnation of Christian virtue.

[Anonymous No.21475982]

>>21475958
Arent those mostly older Evangelicals though? Not exactly /pol/ demographic.

[Anonymous No.21475983]

>>21475982
yeah lol /pol/ hates big don

[Anonymous No.21475985]

>>21475881
I don't think the trinity is that relevant in this context, many early Christians had a different view of the trinity and they were just as conservative.
If it's just about conservativism, why aren't you a Jew or Muslim?
I don't want to tip my fedora too hard here but when I was still a Catholic I never thought about the political implications of my belief. I just believed in God because yo me he was as real as the keyboard I'm typing on or the air I'm breathing. I was 100% convinced, that Jesus of Nazareth really rose from the dead as a historical fact.
Maybe you believe those things too, it's just weird to me that so many people nowadays seem to adopt Christianity because they are republicans and not the other way around. One anon directly said that he became a Christian because that would help save the west, when I told him that that only meant that his beliefs were useful and not necessarily true, he just said he was a pragmatist.

[Anonymous No.21476030]

>>21475985
The Trinity is central to Christianity, without the Trinity you're not a Christian, it's a completely different God, different religion. This is what the entire first ecumenical council was about.
>If it's just about conservativism, why aren't you a Jew or Muslim?
It's not just about "conservatism" It's about truth and correctness. The conservatism just catches people's eye because it's so different to the hyper-liberal dystopia we live in. I don't really see Islam or Judaism as conservative anyway, Talmudic Judaism isn't even a religion as much as it is cultural mythology for Jews (most of them are atheists, including the "Orthodox" ones) Islam is extremely degenerate and allows all kinds of sexual immoralities and is quickly becoming "cucked" in the /pol/ sense (female imams, modernism)
>I don't want to tip my fedora too hard here but when I was still a Catholic I never thought about the political implications of my belief. I just believed in God because yo me he was as real as the keyboard I'm typing on or the air I'm breathing. I was 100% convinced, that Jesus of Nazareth really rose from the dead as a historical fact.
I think we misunderstood eachother, I don't think of Christianity as just some political tool for my own purposes in some Marxist "opiate of the masses" sense, I'm genuinely becoming convinced of it. The draw of Christianity (Really Orthodoxy in particular) is people see all this messed up stuff going on in the world, with transgender children, the subjugation of Western countries and only the Orthodox Church has really stood up against these things. Their "conservatism" is reflective of their spiritual truth and correctness.

[Anonymous No.21476037]

>>21474981
Dawkins doesn't even begin to address this "steelmanned" argument for the existence of God. The technological singularity will create God.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxYbA1pt8LA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0BFJpKpwVE

[Anonymous No.21476042]

>>21476030
>Their "conservatism" is reflective of their spiritual truth and correctness.
Well, I'm not 100% convinced but that's actually a decent argument.

[Anonymous No.21476044]

>>21475955
>(implying there's a hard distinction in the first place)
There is. The point that I was trying to make is there are people who place there hopes in the world (the material and ephemeral), only care about worldly issues (like politics), and place there hopes in worldly institutions (like political parties), instead of staying true to God and obeying his Commandments in thought,word, and deed.
>That does exist but it would still be better to take that chance IMO, now the real scam is donating to international "charities" and NGOs which are always scams or coverups for some really messed up stuff.
I totally agree. If you don't know if the person is really homeless, then give him the money, but if the person is clearly a drug addict, then it is better to give him something that is hard to liquidate (like food and clothing), or encourage him to go to rehab and pray for him.

[Anonymous No.21476073]

>>21476044
My issue with the whole
>Politics vs Religion
dialectic is that people use it as an excuse to be apathetic and will piety signal
>Oh you care about abortion? You care about immigration? How worldly of you
ignoring that this stuff has real consequences on people. That's very different from worshipping some dweeb like Elon Musk or Orange Man though.

[Anonymous No.21476605]

>>21475435
Well, what if I'm wrong, I mean — anybody could be wrong. We could all be wrong about the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the pink unicorn and the flying teapot. You happen to have been brought up, I would presume, in a Christian faith. You know what it's like to not believe in a particular faith because you're not a Muslim. You're not a Hindu. Why aren't you a Hindu? Because you happen to have been brought up in America, not in India. If you had been brought up in India, you'd be a Hindu. If you had been brought up in Denmark in the time of the Vikings, you'd be believing in Wotan and Thor. If you were brought up in classical Greece, you'd be believing in Zeus. If you were brought up in central Africa, you'd be believing in the great Juju up the mountain. There's no particular reason to pick on the Judeo-Christian god, in which by the sheerest accident you happen to have been brought up and ask me the question, "What if I'm wrong?"

[Anonymous No.21476710]

>>21476605
What a marvelous impression of a retarded redditor who gets his opinions straight off atheist blogs

[Anonymous No.21476717]

>>21476710
It's a Dawkins quote. But how would you refute it?

[Anonymous No.21476728]

>>21476717
>But how would you refute it?
By pointing out that I've done my comparative religion and that I was brought up as an atheist who never went to church or read the Bible so I wasn't brought up in any faith and had a neutral position toward all of them.

[Anonymous No.21476782]

>>21476717
>It's a Dawkins quote. But how would you refute it?
And if I were born in Britain in the 20th century, I would also be a limp-wristed milquetoast liberal atheist like yourself. What's your point, Dawkins?

[Anonymous No.21476788]

>>21474981
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPJQw-x-xho

[Anonymous No.21476796]

>>21474981
Underage or emotionally stunted underage detected my lovely and fellow negroes

[Anonymous No.21476864]

>>21474981
books are hardly relevant anymore so that isn't saying much even if it were true (it's not)

[Anonymous No.21476914]

>>21475345
You mean this actual brainlet?

[Anonymous No.21476958]

>>21476782
The point is that Pascal's Wager doesn't make any sense, unless you think the true god will be happy as long as you worship *some* god (e.g. the true god is the great Juju in the mountain, but he'll accept you because you were a Christian). But that's not what religions tell you. Are Muslims going to heaven with Christians?

[Anonymous No.21477146]

>>21476605
What a n*ggerbrain argument. If any of those gods were real, our shitty government would make it classified. Richard Dawkins should be in space jail

[Anonymous No.21478417]

>>21475851
I am struggling to believe in God, but I started going back to the church because I wish to go past this struggling and start believing again

[Anonymous No.21478749]

Good bait, I approve.

[Anonymous No.21478770]

>>21474981
>cnn't
neat freudian slip