/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.22671256]

Christ sisters...

[Anonymous No.22671262]

>>22671256
>inb4 “we’re free but like, also not haha”

[Anonymous No.22671267]

*farts*

I just farted in your thread.

FAQ
>What does this mean?
The amount of jannies (faggots) in this thread and 4chan account has increased by one.

>Why did you do this?
There are several reasons I may deem a comment to be deserving of a stinky fart and therefore a janny infestation. These include, but are not limited to:

Shitting in the street,

Spreading incorrect information,

Reddit/twitter screencap threads.

>Am I banned from the /lit/?
No - not yet. But you should refrain from making threads like this in the future. Otherwise I will be forced to issue an additional fart, which may put your commenting and posting privileges in jeopardy.

>I don't believe my thread deserved a fart. Can you un-fart it?
No. I cannot un-fart. My judgement is perfect and clear. Regardless, if you would like to issue an appeal, shoot me a private message explaining what I got wrong. I tend to respond to 4chan PMs within several seconds. Do note, however, that over 99.9% of fart appeals are rejected, and yours is likely no exception.

>How can I prevent this from happening in the future?
Accept the fart and move on. But learn from this mistake: your behavior will not be tolerated on /lit/. I will continue to fart in your threads until you improve your conduct. Remember: 4chan is hell. You can check out whenever you want and for however long you want. But you can never leave.

[Anonymous No.22671273]

Every single objection is an atheist not understanding the union of Jesus' human and divine nature. The first comment is already such an erroneous understanding of the Trinity (Sabellian heresy actually, it's what is being described) that the rest should not be taken seriously.

[Anonymous No.22671327]

>>22671256
>>22671262
I just tell them to read Aquinas and then move on with my day

[Anonymous No.22671330]

>>22671327
>The Blessed in the Kingdom of Heaven Will See the Punishments of the Damned So That Their Bliss May Be More Delightful to Them
my favorite Aquinas quote

[Anonymous No.22671339]

>>22671273
in what sense is jesus god? just answer

[Anonymous No.22672121]

>>22671256
>they focus on evangelicals to feel smart but always present literal interpretations of the bible
Fedora tippers. Lol.

[Anonymous No.22672132]

>>22671339
God is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Father is not the Son or the Holy Spirit and the Son is not the Holy Spirit.

[Anonymous No.22672134]

>>22672132

[Anonymous No.22672216]

here we go again with another 'who pumps the batmobile tires?' thread....

[Anonymous No.22672327]

>>22672132
>>22672134
Why do christians think it is necessary to believe in the 3 separate entities that make up God in their theoretical concept and it's not enough to just believe in God? I mean, at the end of the day, all you know about Jesus, you have heard from what men have written down two thousand years ago and then those texts were carefully curated by a roman council.

This is the one thing I have never been able to come to terms with in Christianity. That faith in Jesus is a requirement for one's salvation and faith in God isn't enough. It just seems wrong, something seems off in all of this. As if Jesus' words have been intentionally misinterpreted or accidentally misunderstood. I think he may very well have been a man who found enlightenment and had a direct connection to the cosmic consciousness that is God, but to then preach that he himself is the only son and we all are separate from God and only can come to God through him, that all seems very wrong to me. Like in my very soul, something about this message doesn't feel right.

His original message may have been that we all are the children of god. We all come from god and will return to god. Not a message of separation, but of unity with God. In that message, no faith in Jesus as a person would be required and there wouldn't be such a huge focus on whether or not Jesus was real or if the miracles he supposedly did actually happened. As it stands, the argument for Jesus being the son of god is: "Jesus is the son of god, he did a lot of things only the son of god could do. Source: trust me bro -circa 50-100 AD."

[Anonymous No.22672367]

>>22672327
>Why do christians think it is necessary to believe in the 3 separate entities that make up God in their theoretical concept and it's not enough to just believe in God?
They do just believe in God. The Doctrine of the Trinity is an explanation of how different aspects of Him are understood via different metaphors found within scripture. The key insight to this is understanding that scriptural language isn't demotic.
>I mean, at the end of the day, all you know about Jesus, you have heard from what men have written down two thousand years ago and then those texts were carefully curated by a roman council.
That's only true if you take things in a very literal sense and its representive of a modern bias projected backward through time. We have 2 millenia of theological work incubated alongside the development of Western civilization as a whole. The Bible represents a diverse range of information from history to poetry.
>Like in my very soul, something about this message doesn't feel right.
Then you should seek out information paths that help you answer such questions in a way that's reconciliatory to your own instincts. There are probably ways to message religious leaders online and I'm willing to be they'd be more than happy to engage with you.

[Anonymous No.22672452]

>>22672367
>We have 2 millenia of theological work incubated alongside the development of Western civilization as a whole. The Bible represents a diverse range of information from history to poetry.
But now you're just appealing to authority that surely all those people who have since expanded on the initial "trust me bro" sources from 2000 years ago can't possibly be wrong about it. But at the same time, 2 different branches of the abrahamic religion are just as important and entrenched in their parts of the world and also have had thousands of scholars write theological work on their holy scripture over the years. They also all believe that they happen to follow the one religion that is correct. But if 1 of the abrahamic religions is in fact right, that means by default 2 of the 3 must be at least partially wrong. And Jesus being the son of God and the messiah happens to be the part where both islam and judaism disagree with christianity, so the odds aren't in your favor. Now I don't mind christians believing in what they believe, but you do have to admit that all abrahamic religions, including yours, are based on the writings of men and the assumption that what they wrote is the truth.

And I just can't do that, I can't put my faith into what men wrote just because others believe it. I mean, imagine if right now a new self-procclaimed prophet came along and would gain some fame and a means to spread their message. Wouldn't you too be very skeptical if not even outright dismissive of any claims they make?

[Anonymous No.22672476]

>>22671262
>if you're a humanist why don't you give every single penny of what you earn to people in need at your own expense
Mega lolz