Kali Yuga

[Anonymous No.6678144]

T.S Eliot is the greatest writer of our times and was wise enough to convert to Christianity. Are you?

Eliot argued that the humanist attempt to form a non-Christian, "rational" civilization was doomed. "The experiment will fail," he wrote, "but we must be very patient in awaiting its collapse; meanwhile redeeming the time: so that the Faith may be preserved alive through the dark ages before us; to renew and rebuild civilization, and save the world from suicide."

He didn't believe society should be ruled by the church, only by Christian principles, with Christians being "the conscious mind and the conscience of the nation."

Was this prophetic writer right?

[Anonymous No.6678151]

Eliot felt very strongly about his denomination, and incorporates its peculiarities in his poetry, I don't think he liked Christendom in general--I don't think he disliked it, but he didn't identify with Christians in general.

[Anonymous No.6678176]

I don't think so.

The foundations for western civilization were already laid by the Romans and Greeks before Christianity became popular or influential, I would argue that Christianity has only had a minor influence on our society in the west today.

Also there are plenty of non-christian societies that get along fine and there have been in the past. Ancient Egypt lasted pretty much as a continuous society for longer then Christianity has even existed.

[Anonymous No.6678181]

>>6678176

>2015 years of dominance is only a minor influence
>we're more like the Egyptians actually...
>I actually have some brain-damage

>>>/b/

[Anonymous No.6678187]

>>6678181
Hallo anon, what is de source of de quoted text in yur poost?

[Anonymous No.6678230]

>>6678181
It seems that you understood my post poorly.

First, Christianity is barely dominant, its only about 31 percent of the world population while Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism have about 23%, 14% and 6.7% respectively. Plus Christianity rates are steeply declining in the West.

Also I meant that western civilization was more influenced by the societal, political and technological advances by the Greeks and Romans then by any cultural influence from religion, I never said we're more like the Egyptians.

You seem to be so eager to argue in favor of you're original post that you don't even really think about what you type in respond to other posters.

[Anonymous No.6678251]

>>6678230
>Christianity is barely dominant, its only about 31 percent of the world population

What % of the population has it been in the West? We're talking about western civilization.

>I meant that western civilization was more influenced by the societal, political and technological advances by the Greeks and Romans then by any cultural influence from religion

that's going to be a hard argument to make, have you read history?

[Anonymous No.6678255]

>>6678230

*in response

[Anonymous No.6678282]

>>6678251

western civilization in Europe was created essentially through Roman conquest because of how the Romans would build towns and infrastructure in their new provinces and teach the native populace Latin, spreading literacy. Democracy we got from the Greeks. Ancient versions of out courts and our laws existed then in Greece and Rome before Christianity spread.

Christianity offered nothing new besides a belief system.

[Anonymous No.6678285]

>>6678282
You seriously think democracy is more significant than "a belief system".

[Anonymous No.6678291]

>>6678144
>T.S Eliot is the greatest writer of our times and was wise enough to convert to Christianity. Are you?

He was COWARDLY enough to convert to Christianity.

Also, GTFO
>>>/pol/

P.S. Christian principles were plagiarized, they are not unique, and are not the first to have some socialist kike roaming around, they are in fact, if mankind is lucky, the last.

[Anonymous No.6678295]

>>6678291
>P.S. Christian principles were plagiarized, they are not unique, and are not the first to have some socialist kike roaming around, they are in fact, if mankind is lucky, the last.

This has got to be one of the silliest things i've ever read on here.

[Anonymous No.6678300]

>>6678291

how is this >>>/pol/ ?
you sound confused

[Anonymous No.6678302]

>>6678285

Of course, democracy is the backbone of the western world, its what governs our societies. A belief system or mythology is just something that some people think about to comfort themselves when not occupied with their work or leisure. To imply the latter is more significant then how a country is run is absurd.

[Anonymous No.6678310]

>>6678295
>he hasn't read Buddhist texts
>he thinks Jesus is unique
>he thinks Christian-esque values based in religion are only 2015 years old

TOP KEK

>>6678300
christfag plz go

>>>/x/

zombies aren't real.

[Anonymous No.6678311]

>>6678302
I'm not sure this is even true in the modern world let alone the times when Christianity was more potent in the west. The average person's life is much more preoccupied and influenced by religion than it is democracy.

[Anonymous No.6678312]

I honestly can't stand T. S. Eliot.

His use of Christianity is false, I'll explain why. Strong men often get the impression that the world is ruled by force. Actors often get the impression that the world is ruled by dissimulation. Businessmen often get the impression that the world is ruled by wealth. And intellectuals, like Eliot, often get the impression that the world is ruled by ideas. The world isn't ruled by ideas, it's ruled by God. Christianity is not one idea among many that is competing with every other idea on the "ideological marketplace" for survival - this fantasy of the ideological marketplace is the delusion of mere intellectuals. Christianity does not exist to serve civilization. "Christian civilization" is not the point of Christianity. What is called "Christian civilization" is really the Church of God populated principally by those souls in a state of sanctifying grace, surrounded by Babylon, the World. True, the Church had an influence on its surroundings and worldly men were taught better manners, and the art was more lofty and spiritual, but that wasn't the end of Christianity, that was its radiance shining on the World which is in fact fundamentally opposed to Christianity.

But that isn't the main reason why I can't stand T. S. Eliot. The main reason is that his poetry is awful. It's wallowing in modern despair and confusion. That is not the Christian spirit.

[Anonymous No.6678314]

>>6678310
Did you seriously just go to Buddhism as your proto-christianity?

[Anonymous No.6678319]

>>6678311

I strongly disagree, you do know that Christianity rates in the west are dropping sharply right?

[Anonymous No.6678321]

>>6678302

but we had monarchies for the longest time, where kings had a sort of 'divine right' and very close relationship to the Church.

simply boiling civilization down to 'Greek democracy' is a really weird oversimplification, specially since Christian thought contributed to the evolution of democratic ideals --- http://www.catholiceducation.org/en/culture/catholic-contributions/the-influence-of-christianity-on-modern-democracy-equality-and-freedom.html

[Anonymous No.6678322]

If you're truly a Christian then you believe that "Christianity" in the truest sense is as strong as it ever was, because the Church of Christ does not become weaker merely because less and less men come to her for salvation. That's to their own damnation, not the Church's. We can lament the decline of "Christian civilization", but that isn't even really worth lamenting. The Scriptures call the time from Christ's resurrection to the end of the world the "end times". "Christian civilization" took place in the end times, i.e. it was never meant to last.

[Anonymous No.6678323]

>>6678314
>care for the poor
>be kind to your neighbor
>buddhas suffered for their neighbor and for a chance to be reborn into something better (boy sounds like going to heaven and receiving a new body, eh?

And they managed to do it without having a God that flooded the entire earth because he was mad that he sucked at creating people.

Also, that flood, yeah, stripped right from the Epic of Gilgamesh

[Anonymous No.6678327]

>>6678319

it's growing in Eastern Europe, China, Africa.

[Anonymous No.6678329]

>>6678323
Buddhist care for the poor is entirely different to Christian care for the poor. You are bamboozled by mere appearances.
Buddhas do not "suffer for their neighbour" whatsoever.

[Anonymous No.6678335]

>>6678323
I dunno why I even come to this website anyone when most people have no fucking idea what they're talking about.

[Anonymous No.6678336]

>>6678323
>Also, that flood, yeah, stripped right from the Epic of Gilgamesh

>thinking that Moses stole from Gilgamesh
>not realizing that there are countless ancient cultures that record the flood and that the memory of the flood was alive all over the ancient world

[Anonymous No.6678337]

>>6678323

Buddhism didn't influence western civilization, its politics, art, science and people for the last 2000years though. So it's not really worth mentioning here.

[Anonymous No.6678338]

What's the point in being Christian if the Second Coming didn't happen when Yeshua said it would?

That's like still being a Buddhist if the Buddha came down and said "Hey guys, turns out, there is no reincarnation!" or still being a Muslim after Yahweh comes down and says "Muhammed was wrong". The crux of your religion failed. Why are you still practicing it?

[Anonymous No.6678341]

>>6678338
>What's the point in being Christian if the Second Coming didn't happen when Yeshua said it would?

Christ never set a date.

[Anonymous No.6678344]

>>6678338
> if the Second Coming didn't happen when Yeshua said it would?


Jesus said no one knows when the second coming will happen. So your premise is wrong from the start. Matthew 24:36

[Anonymous No.6678351]

>>6678311
>average persons life is more preoccupied and influenced by religion than democracy
I kekked 7/10 if baiting, 10/10 if you are this retarded.

[Anonymous No.6678353]

>>6678341
>this generation will not pass away until all things take place.
And that doesn't even get into the "soon" of Revelations.

[Anonymous No.6678359]

>>6678327
>it's growing in Eastern Europe, China, Africa
MUH christianity is a symbol of advanced society, yea right.
Also, I live in eastern europe and in my country and neighbouring countries atheism is the fastest growing "religion" .

[Anonymous No.6678360]

>>6678351

but we had monarchies not democracies for the majority of western civilization in the past 2000 years.

even our democracies were influenced by christianity.

[Anonymous No.6678364]

>>6678344
Matthew 24: 25-34, Mark 13:26-30, Luke 21:27-32. Yeshua is pretty certain that it's going to happen soon. In fact, within the lifetimes of his original followers.

[Anonymous No.6678366]

>>6678351
How can you be this ignorant? I understand it's "cool" among stupid people to hate on Christianity at the moment but even so how can you possibly think this?

[Anonymous No.6678369]

>>6678360
You had non-secular states which used religion as a tool to control the masses.
>work and do not complain in this life and you will have a nice afterlife
mfw when you do not know what autocracy is
mfw when all christposters have 0 history knowledge
mfw you claim french democracy after the revolution was influenced by christianity
"Kill the whore!!" Voltaire said this refering directly to the Church.
How about you read something than come back here and post your opinions instead of shitposting.

[Anonymous No.6678375]

>>6678353
Chrys.: All these things therefore mean what was said of the end of Jerusalem, of the false prophets, and the false Christs, and all the rest which shall happen down to the time of Christ’s coming, That He said, “This generation,” He meant not of the men then living, but of the generation of the faithful; for so Scripture uses to speak of generations, not of time only, but of place, life, and conversation; as it is said, “This, is the generation of them that seek the Lord.” [Ps 24:6]

Herein He teaches that Jerusalem shall perish, and the greater part of the Jews be destroyed, but that no trial shall overthrow the generation of the faithful.

Origen: Yet shall the generation of the Church survive the whole of this world, that it may inherit the world to come, yet it shall not pass away until all these things have come to pass. But when all these shall have been fulfilled, then not the earth only but the heavens also shall pass away; that is, not only the men whose life is earthly, and who are therefore called the earth, but also they whose conversation is in heaven, and who are therefore called the heaven; these “shall pass away” to things to come, that they may come to better things.

But the words spoken by the Saviour shall not pass away, because they effect and shall ever effect their purpose; but the perfect and they that admit no further improvement, passing through what they are, come to that which they are not; and this is that, “My words shall not pass away.” And perhaps the words of Moses and the Prophets have passed away, because all that they prophesied has [p. 831] been fulfilled; but the words of Christ are always complete, daily fulfilling and to be fulfilled in the saints. Or perhaps we ought not to say that the words of Moses and the Prophets are once for all fulfilled; seeing they also are the words of the Son of God, and are fulfilled continually.

Jerome: Or, by “generation” here He means the whole human race, and the Jews in particular. And He adds, “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away,” to confirm their faith in what has gone before; as though He had said, it is easier to destroy things solid and immovable, than that aught should fail of my words.
Hilary: For heaven and earth have in their constitution no necessity of existence, but Christ’s words derived from eternity have in them such virtue that they must needs abide.

[Anonymous No.6678377]

>>6678364
>it's going to happen soon

soon is relative...man has existed for over 150,000 years.
If it happens in the next 5000 years, that would be pretty soon.

[Anonymous No.6678379]

>>6678319
Yes like I said Christanity is losing potency yet it's still more relevent to western life, culture and history than anything else - besides the basic needs themselves, food etc which Christanity has still managed to propagate as a part of itself.

[Anonymous No.6678382]

>>6678377
So you're telling me there's still Jews walking around from 2,000+ years ago? Damn, fuckers must really be the Chosen People if they can pull that off.

>>6678375
>Biblical Subjectivism
No.

[Anonymous No.6678385]

>>6678369

we wouldn't even have science if it weren't for Christian scientists and catholic monks. And yes Christianity has been the driving force behind all our politics, social traditions, values, art, and science. Nothing has not been improved by it

[Anonymous No.6678390]

>le Kali Yuga
>le gnosticism
Spew your meme philosophy elsewhere, Evolafags.

[Anonymous No.6678391]

>>6678369
I'm French and you truly don't know anything about the Revolution.

Besides anticlericanism =/= antichristianism. I guess Luther was hardcore fedora and Wesley even more.

I swear fedoraposting is ten times worse than Christposting.

[Anonymous No.6678392]

>>6678382
>2000 year old jews

nah, the word "generation" there in Greek is γενεα (genea), which can also refer to a family, stock, nation. (Strongs, definition 2b) The NASB also has a footnote here next to "generation" saying "Or race"

[Anonymous No.6678397]

>>6678366
muh pogroms
muh feudal papal state
muh crusader wars
muh inquisition
muh indulgence
muh 30 year war
muh CEDA ( Francisco Franco )
muh Lateran treaty
muh Reichskonkordat
muh hatred towards science
muh hatred towards human rights
muh hatred towards homosexuals
>christianity is worth anything in any context

[Anonymous No.6678400]

>>6678385
>we wouldn't even have science if it weren't for Christian scientists and catholic monks. And yes Christianity has been the driving force behind all our politics, social traditions, values, art, and science
Baiting this hard
0/10

[Anonymous No.6678401]

>>6678397
>muh hatred towards homosexuals

they shouldn't be hated, they should simply be educated better and shown the error of their ways.

[Anonymous No.6678403]

>>6678391
>I am french therefore I know more about the Revolution about you
Revolution was directed against the Church as much as it was directed against nobility.

[Anonymous No.6678404]

>>6678323
Is there anything worse than "reasoning" by analogy? Even the other fallacies seem tame comapred to this abomination.

>dun some tribe in the Pacific said they were eating spirits in ceremonies
>the Eucharist, obvious ripoff

[Anonymous No.6678406]

>>6678251
Foundations of modern law? Mostly Roman with some exceptions, like the Anglo common law. Both of pagan origin.

Modern government? Mixture of Germanic institutions with Roman inspired complications. Pagan origin.

Modern education? Humanists successfully scrubbed religious study and left Greek influences. Pagan origin.

Clergy were prominent in the study of many things, but this is different from saying their work was based on Christianity. Clergy were frequently rich and had plenty of free time, like many religions. It could of been priests of Hastur doing some of these things and the result would of been the same.

>2015 years

Christianity wasn't popular in most of Europe well into the 1st millenium.

>of dominance

Dominance of religious affairs is dominance of a small facet of western civilization as Christianity doesn't provide codes of social organization like Judaism and Islam do. Most communities could flount Christian beliefs because no one cared how peasants ran their own affairs as long as they were peaceful and paid their dues. Most people didn't even understand mass.

[Anonymous No.6678407]

Christianity -- the obvious invention of first century Roman emperors -- is far too young a religion to take seriously. Plus, whether Christianity is good for society is irrelevant to me. I'm concerned with what's true.

[Anonymous No.6678408]

>>6678397

is this you?

[Anonymous No.6678411]

>>6678144
I still don't see why christianity is superior to the older religions.
Is it because of the ultimatum, a greater loss?

[Anonymous No.6678414]

>>6678407
>I'm concerned with what's true.

meditate on John 14:6.

[Anonymous No.6678416]

>>6678403
"Revolution" doesn't mean anything when talking these points. Majority of the clergy was favorable to the Revolution. You have to wait late 1792 to see the fedora in action.

>>6678397
All of these memes simultaneously.

[Anonymous No.6678417]

>>6678414
Anyone can make a statement like that, though.

[Anonymous No.6678421]

>>6678414
You're telling me to trust the bible is true because the bible says it's true.

I refer you back to my post >>6678407. It is true because I declare it so.

[Anonymous No.6678423]

>>6678408
Is that the best you can do? I was expecting some fedora pics. Also, why do people who are against religion automatically considered mad / frustrated.I couldnt care less if half of the world is so retarded that they accept dogmas and idiocy of christianity. I am just saying that christians should get of their high horse when it comes to morals, you bitches have a lot to apologise for.

[Anonymous No.6678424]

>>6678411
>I still don't see why christianity is superior to the older religions.

Because of this.

[Anonymous No.6678427]

>>6678423
>why do people who are against religion automatically considered mad / frustrated

probably because they sound frustrated and say things like this:

> half of the world is so retarded that they accept dogmas and idiocy of christianity....get of their high horse when it comes to morals, you bitches have a lot to apologise for.

[Anonymous No.6678429]

>>6678416
In August, 1789, the State cancelled the taxing power of the Church. The issue of church property became central to the policies of the new revolutionary government. Declaring that all church property in France belonged to the nation, confiscations were ordered and church properties were sold at public auction.
You are a fucking disgrace for a frenchman, you do not know your own history. Jump off a bridge apologetic prick.
Also, muh memes, is that the best you can do?
Can you offer some counter argument?

[Anonymous No.6678430]

>>6678424
I was blind but now i see

[Anonymous No.6678433]

>>6678427
But we are on /lit/, not on reddit or youtube.

[Anonymous No.6678435]

>>6678427
If you think that I am frustrated and you thrive on that it really says more about you than me.

[Anonymous No.6678436]

>>6678430

Praise the Lord.

[Anonymous No.6678439]

>>6678397
It's like you don't even understand what's being discussed. It doesn't matter how "negatively" you understand the influence of Christianity, that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

[Anonymous No.6678440]

>>6678406
>Foundations of modern law? Mostly Roman with some exceptions, like the Anglo common law. Both of pagan origin.
"Roman" means canon law. No one cared about Augustinian laws after a while.

>Modern government? Mixture of Germanic institutions with Roman inspired complications. Pagan origin.
There isn't any Christian government, but you are completely wrong in thinking questions of law and politics come from "pagan" influence.

>Modern education? Humanists successfully scrubbed religious study and left Greek influences. Pagan origin.
Have you even tried to read the basis of modern education? You refer to "humanists". I suggest reading Petrarch or Castoglione or Erasme, you know, the humanists.

>most of Europe
I guess other anon was talking about populated regions.

[Anonymous No.6678447]

>>6678429
nationalization of Church property was not an anti-Christian mesure. At most it was anti-clerical (which it wasn't really in 89).

For the record, there had been nationalization of Church properties in the past, from Chrales Martel to Philippe IV.

The majority of the clergy voted for the suppression of the bulk of Church priviledges.

[Anonymous No.6678451]

>>6678439
>Hitlers didnt influence the course of history
>he should be praised for that
Negative influence =/= positive influence.
Also, are you trying to convey the idea that all of the mentioned things can be understood as positive. How braindead you have to be to state such a thing ?

[Anonymous No.6678453]

>>6678451
Ahh I see the problem, you have no reading comprehension. Nowhere did I praise or condemn Christianity, I simply stated that it has had a greater influence on western life than democracy.

[Anonymous No.6678455]

>>6678302
>>6678302
Are...Are you fucking stupid? Democracy doesn't govern any society, it just decides who governs. A moral code often stemming from religious values plays (or used to play) a big part in deciding what they actually do.

If you have a considerable amount of power (which happens whether or not democracy is present), you need a moral code to temper and regulate decisions. In the West our system of morality is absolutely, undeniably shaped by Christianity and our legislative history has reflected that time and time again, only stopping now as secularism runs rampant.

[Anonymous No.6678459]

>>6678397
Half of these need to be interpreteed as they don't mean anything : "hatred towads human rights".

The others are pathetic attempts at listing supposed evils. Picking inquisition is rather funny, as it goes against this anon pretense >>6678406, consireing that the laws of evidence now received are copy pasted from inquisition, that has a ridiculously low kill count for a 400 year institution, mostly about thieves.

As for the Reichkonkordat, it was a piece by which Hitler tried to curb the only opposition he had in Germany, pic related.

All of the other claims are just as stupid.

[Anonymous No.6678462]

>>6678447
mfw you think seizing property from church is at most anti-clerical
mfw french didnt allow any religion aside from catholic christianity
mfw you gave two examples of rulers who tried to solidify their reign by controlling the religion
mfw you mistake juror / non juror ratio as clergy who was for the revolution
mfw you are from france and you are this retarded

[Anonymous No.6678465]

>>6678336
Yep. That guy is moron; why talk about ancient culture and religion when you nothing about it?

[Anonymous No.6678467]

>>6678453
And yet you gave no evidence to support your claim. Give some reasons to it and we can discuss it.

[Anonymous No.6678468]

>>6678462
Well there is nothing to be added here.
You're right, the revolution was primarly and actually only about destroying Chrisitanity from the very start, no from long before it started.

[Anonymous No.6678469]

>>6678181
>>6678300
>>6678344
Does she have short hair to make her look more like an alter boy?

[Anonymous No.6678471]

>>6678467
are you honestly trying to argue the point that christianity DIDN'T have an influence on society?

[Anonymous No.6678476]

>>6678469

she has a ponytail, if you look closely

[Anonymous No.6678477]

>>6678471
You have yet to learn the arcane art of shitposting.

[Anonymous No.6678480]

>>6678397
It's funny how everyone else is capable articulating their points with intelligible sentences, but you just use memes. A sure sign you either a. not a regular here or b. shitposter.

[Anonymous No.6678481]

>>6678471

he's a fedora who thinks the Greeks/Egyptians had more impact on the West than Christianity has.

[Anonymous No.6678484]

>>6678467
lmao this website is too funny. I suppose I also have to show you have Christianity drew from Judaism?

[Anonymous No.6678486]

>>6678459
>spanish inquisition = all of inquisition
> 5000 deaths is low (in Spain alone )
> most were thieves
> 150 000 accused people who were mostly sentenced to manual labour / public punishment is acceptable (in Spain alone)
> Jozef Tiso
> Ustasha regime leaders werent given azile by the church
> one of the main concentration camps of Ustasha regime wasnt run by Miroslav Filipovic
> Reichkonkordat isnt buying priests for Hitlers purposes, almost in the same way Mussollini did

[Anonymous No.6678487]

>>6678467
>Actually demanding evidence that Christianity influenced Western society.

I've never seen anyone on lit with quite so weak an understanding of what they're actually talking about.

[Anonymous No.6678492]

>>6678471
I am saying christianity didnt have a useful influence. I am not the same dude who posted how christianity was derived from other religions and our culture was derived from Roman / Greek influences, although he is correct.

[Anonymous No.6678493]

>>6678492
1. I litterally haven't seen a single person (besides you) argue about whether or not Christianity had a positive influence or not.

2. Omg you're so fucking stupid.

[Anonymous No.6678500]

>>6678486
5000 deaths is ridiculously low for something this long.
In the same time span, there were much much much more executions from non inquisition courts which were much less serious about evidence.

Giving asylum is not a crime when it's done directly by the institution that deals with the refugees (unlike a state taking refugees in name of the country).

Reichkonkordat was a failure. The Church lost all work connection after bringing down the eugenics campaign, and became an official enemy during the war. Are you seriously trying to tie the Church with the NSDAP? That's a whole new level of Godwin point.

[Anonymous No.6678501]

>>6678492
cont. I also think that democracy has a bigger imact on my everyday life than religion. Just compare non-secular / secular states and then try to tell me religions are somehow useful and good ?
I see religion as nothing more than a tool for opression ( christianity / islam ) and when you compare some debates on the internet you always find that christians are full on retards, same as muslims, but jews can sound reasonable. I also find it funny that there are so many christposters on /lit/ who go about shitposting about fedoras when the anti-religion views have been in circulation since greek philosophy.

[Anonymous No.6678504]

>>6678492
What about regulating and deterring rash and dangerous decisions in a strong-government system? You'd need a clear, unalterable moral framework to determine which actions are bad and which are good.

[Anonymous No.6678505]

>>6678501
>implying those non-secular states aren't using a system of morality defined by centuries of religion.

[Anonymous No.6678509]

>>6678501
What about the recurring horror of a non-secular state that actually tries to destroy the moral framework of their religion? Khmer Rouge for example?

[Anonymous No.6678514]

>>6678501
If you don't believe in anything, surely "religion" has little impact on your life.
What do you mean by democracy? The thing that has probably the most influence in your life is your government, democratic or not.

The state and its "democracy" are tools of oppressions. My mother come from one of these democratic shitholes and quickly felt this oppression.

You try to attach anti-religion view with philosophy because that makes you feel euphoric. Anti-religion has little to do with that. There are anti-religion people among primitive people.

[Anonymous No.6678515]

>>6678493
mfw you think giving asylum to mass murderers is justifiable
mfw you just cherrypick my post and ignore things you do not like
mfw you drive conclusions out of thin air
mfw 5000 deaths are somehow justified in your mind
mfw you think that it is justifiable that the children of executed people were forced to beg on the streets because everyone feared giving shelter to them
mfw I choked on the bait

[Anonymous No.6678521]

>>6678514
religion has an impact on everyone in the West, religious or not. We're living in countries built by Christians under constitutions written by Christians.

[Anonymous No.6678523]

>>6678515
I think you quoted the wrong poster.

[Anonymous No.6678524]

>>6678411
It isn't. It's essentially a meme religion in that it gained acceptance through Christfags not shutting the fuck up about it for 2000 years. I wouldn't trust any religion that's as young as Christianity.

[Anonymous No.6678526]

>>6678515
>Focusing on some fetish number, diregarding all the conditions such as time span
Some people died from vaccination. So evil. Pure satanism. Hang the vaccinators.
How can you conceive vaccination to be okay?

[Anonymous No.6678536]

>>6678504
> you need a book that defines women as property as a moral guide
>>6678505
Ethics=/= religion
>>6678509
Khmer rouge replaced religion with cult of personality, same as soviet union / communists. Lenin / Stalin would have been retarded not to use centuries of autocracy at their disposal
>>6678514
>democracy is a tool of opression
Well Ian Hutchinson can derive formulas for bremsthalung radiation in quasineutral isotropic plasmas in his head and still go on rambling about creationism / intelligent design. Religious beliefs are personal and individual, but unlike popular views like Platinga science and religion are by definition disparate.

[Anonymous No.6678550]

>>6678536
>Thinking I'm talking about the Bible on its own and not the Bible as represented by the Church with most of the shit filtered out.

[Anonymous No.6678552]

>>6678536
That is fascinating. I mean you literally know nothing. Who was the head of the Khmer Rouge personality cult then?

If you say Pol Pot I will actually fucking lose my sides forever.

[Anonymous No.6678553]

>>6678327
At nowhere near the same rate as Islam

[Anonymous No.6678554]

>>6678526
>one death over religious beliefs is justified
"Between 1540 and 1794, tribunals in Lisbon, Porto, Coimbra and Évora resulted in the burning of 1,175 persons, the burning of another 633 in effigy, and the penancing of 29,590. But documentation of 15 out of 689[38] autos-da-fé has disappeared, so these numbers may slightly understate the activity."
This is from portughese inquisiton. Also, why did you ignore those 150 000 mentioned and btw the rest of my post.
"Renaissance history professor and Inquisition expert Carlo Ginzburg had his doubts about using statistics to reach a judgment about the period. “In many cases, we don’t have the evidence, the evidence has been lost,” said Ginzburg."
Also, your analogy is supremely retarded.
>you die from vaccination because of your religious beliefs after being put to trial
I really hope that you are baiting.

[Anonymous No.6678558]

Let me just say that, we all just feel like our interpretation of the information that is given to us, we look for and see around us, is what we think is the truth. Obviously no one really knows what the truth is.

Everything is just a theory, just an idea about what this is we live in and who we are. It's all subjective. Yes also the most supported scientific facts/theories or religious texts.

What I appreciate about science is that it doesn't deny this. If something seems impossible to be disproven gets disproven tomorrow with new information and/ or new interpretations of the information we already have. The old idea/ theory is thrown away and a new one takes its place. Which again is there untill there is a better one to replace it once again.

This is something I can't find in religion. we keep learning more about the world, the universe and ourselves, but religious texts stay the same.

I value the good stories that are in these religious texts to learn something from it. About morality mostly.

However the only argument that I ever get when I ask why I should take all these religious texts literally as the truth about us and our world.. Is that many before you have believed in it and you have this special feeling that there is "something" out there, or around us, or above us, or beneath us, or some place we can't see. Well yes everyone feels that. But instead of believing someone knows what that is and already knew a long fucking time ago, how about leaving it open for now... Since we don't.

I hope this post is not a complete mess since English and I wouldve probably even fucked it up in my native language.

[Anonymous No.6678561]

>>6678552
mfw you think a totalitarian regime is a prime example of secular society.
My sides have already ascended into high orbit.

[Anonymous No.6678564]

>>6678552
In the minds of many fedora, their quasi-religion of fedoraism is so sacred that they outright refuse to admit that anone has ever been killed by atheists for religious reasons.

Phrase the question explicitely :
>Has, in all history, ever been a single case where an atheist killed a non-atheist for purely religious reason?

They will lose their shit. Some may even actually respond no. When confronted with actions that fill the condition, they will pretend that a subtle religion or quasi-religion motivated the murderers.

[Anonymous No.6678571]

>>6678550
Same church that harbours a ring of fucking paedophiles is your moral axis?
You probably adore Mother Teresa and find that Paul Marcinkus did nothing wrong.

[Anonymous No.6678579]

>>6678561
A totalitarian regime is a prime example of secularism.
As Mussolini said, nothing but the state, nothing outside the state. This is what totalitarianism is.

Now, having everything brought down to earth to the administrative level is secularism pushed to the limit. You can't beat that.
No reference to any higher existence. All is confined in the placid immanence of temporal government.

[Anonymous No.6678580]

>>6678561
Except I obviously didn't say that. I'm arguing that a secular society which hasn't eradicated prior moral frameworks which were built on religion is less harmful than secular societies which have. Both are prime examples of secularism. Did you just join this argument halfway through or are you a complete fuckwit?

[Anonymous No.6678584]

>>6678571
They were paedophiles in secret. They weren't preaching that everyone should become a paedophile. My point about the church filtering out the shit in the bible still stands.

[Anonymous No.6678588]

>>6678429
Yes, they just cancelled it. Just like that. Because Christian "dominance" was never particulary great.

>>6678440
So canon law is based on pagan law. Canon law has never dominated the west.

[Anonymous No.6678589]

>>6678564
Nobody will lose their shit.
BUT MUH STALIN KILLED PRIESTS
Stalin killed millions of others because he was deranged.
Give me one totalitarian regime which didnt rely on violence,pious / non-pious.

[Anonymous No.6678591]

>>6678571
Every big organisation hosts pedophiles.
A few examples : British government, French government, American government, all of the major hollywood studios, the Grand Orient masonic lodge, ...

Misdeeds by people linked to the Church does not even really concern OPs point. Calvin thought the institution perverted and didn't go fedora.

[Anonymous No.6678592]

Why does this board turn into /pol/ whenever religion gets brought up?

[Anonymous No.6678593]

>>6678144
Fuck Christians

[Anonymous No.6678596]

>>6678589
Do you agree the Red Khmers killed for atheism?

[Anonymous No.6678601]

>X claimed Y
>therefore it's true

What a sad place /lit/ has become

[Anonymous No.6678606]

>>6678592
>no mention of jews
>no mention of negroes
>no mention of sjw
If anything, the guy ITT that has a bizarre boner for ancient paganism is the closest to /pol/.

[Anonymous No.6678607]

>>6678589
Just because he killed millions of others for various other reasons doesn't mean he didn't also kill in the name of atheism and make a determined attempt to replace religious morality with something new.

[Anonymous No.6678608]

>>6678589
>they killed for atheism
>>6678591
>>6678584
I wanted to reasonably debate with you guys who claimed that secular society is inferior to non-secular, but there I see no point. These posts are the epitome of religion.

[Anonymous No.6678615]

>>6678592

of course it takes two to argue but I think in general its the pro-christian posters who relentlessly try to defend Christianity and refute everything even when they are wrong

the anti-christian posters usually are pretty well reasoned and open minded, it seems like its the christ-posters who are incapable of agreeing to disagree if we call it that

[Anonymous No.6678619]

>>6678607

It doesn't mean he did either

[Anonymous No.6678623]

>>6678608
>absolutely no attempt to refute my point about the bible.
>absolutely cannot accept that a divine moral code can benefit society at large even if those preaching do immoral things.

haha byeeeee then :)

[Anonymous No.6678624]

>>6678291
>sends other people to /pol/
>'some socialist kike roaming around'

No anon, you are /pol/.

[Anonymous No.6678625]

>>6678615
If some fag came up to you and said "why don't you suck cocks it's great" and bugged you about it every day then you'd want to punch him in the face after a while

That's what christ posting is like.

[Anonymous No.6678628]

>>6678623

Right, because you didn't have any points, you had pointless handwaving that in your opinion were points, that doesn't make them so

[Anonymous No.6678629]

>>6678608
Never have I claimed anything about "non-secular" societies being better than "secular" societies.
I somehow except that it wouldn't go well.
The posts you quoted have nothing to do with religion.

[Anonymous No.6678633]

Nobody gives a fuck about your pathological obsessions, OP

[Anonymous No.6678635]

>>6678606
I meant the lack of nuance or evidence of any serious research. Just endless shit flinging from both sides. It's most apparent in the islam threads

[Anonymous No.6678637]

>>6678625
I suck cocks regularly. I am also a christposter.
Get on my level.

[Anonymous No.6678640]

>>6678615
anti-christian posters are pretty well reasoned and open minded.

Maybe actually read the thread before you jump in cheering for your own team? There's a guy here who actually thinks that Christianity had less of an effect on society than the Roman Empire.

[Anonymous No.6678641]

>>6678637
Epic troll dude did you make that one up on the fly all creative and clever like?

[Anonymous No.6678644]

>>6678635
This is true, but you are deluded if you think the rest of 4chan isn't exactly the same.

[Anonymous No.6678645]

>>6678623
This is how the SJWs think, and why I think they shoud all fuck off the right wing where they belong, and many them came from.

Why do you think so many of them are found to be doing horrible things and yet they go after people making statements, or those found to be guilty of the crime of influencing other people's actions?

Fighting the SJW is fighting a religious mode of thought. That establishing virtues is more important than being virtuous.

[Anonymous No.6678650]

>>6678641
Nope, I'm simply gay.
I do feel clever though. This is probably the same euphoria feeling one gets from bashing religion and feeling enlightened by ones own intelligence.

[Anonymous No.6678652]

>>6678645
Welcome to Stirner cuntfuck

[Anonymous No.6678659]

>>6678640

he is right though

[Anonymous No.6678661]

>>6678628
Oh I see.

Well when I say this

>absolutely cannot accept that a divine moral code can benefit society at large even if those preaching do immoral things.

I obviously mean this:

>a divine moral code can benefit society at large even if those preaching do immoral things.

How is that not a point again?

[Anonymous No.6678664]

>>6678645
>using the expression "rigth wing" outside the party politics context
>linking this "right wing" with stupidity
>linking this "right wing" with religion
>link to a post doesn't respond to it
You win, I can't take this anymore.

[Anonymous No.6678665]

>>6678619
he did though

[Anonymous No.6678672]

>>6678661

Because that would mean they've proven their own moral code wrong themselves?

If the moral rules that certain people preach don't have any effect on those very people themselves, there's not really a point in following them, is there?

[Anonymous No.6678674]

>>6678659
He's not. There is nothing left from the Roman Empire.
It's even worse than muh heritage 1/32 Sioux people in the US.

[Anonymous No.6678675]

>>6678665

Is that why he reopened the Moscow Theological Seminary in 1945?

[Anonymous No.6678678]

>>6678672
Yes. People are fallible and do stupid, cruel and immoral things. Even those who preach. They haven't proven it wrong at all, they've just failed to follow it because of their own selfish desires.

That was the shittest response I have ever heard.

[Anonymous No.6678683]

>>6678678
>People are fallible and do stupid, cruel and immoral things.

And here's the million dollar question, what is morality specifically for?

Think really hard, it has something to do with what I quoted

[Anonymous No.6678685]

>>6678675
a weak and ineffectual gesture. Nothing more.

[Anonymous No.6678686]

>>6678672
Name a single "moral code" that was followed. Even Stirner was spooked.

Should you stop condemning murder on the basis that making it illegelal has not stopped murderers?

[Anonymous No.6678692]

>>6678686

Trail and error is followed by almost everyone

[Anonymous No.6678697]

>>6678685

>if you present contradictions to my points, they don't really count

HAHAHAHA, Jesus Christ, christposters must be the shittest group of 'thinkers' ever

[Anonymous No.6678706]

>>6678683
A system of morality is there to deter people from doing stupid, cruel and immoral things. Just because some disobey the system doesn't mean it doesn't work at all.

[Anonymous No.6678710]

>>6678692
what do you mean? I don't understand

[Anonymous No.6678711]

>>6678706
>A system of morality is there to deter people from doing stupid, cruel and immoral things.

And according to you, it doesn't do any of that.

>Just because some disobey the system doesn't mean it doesn't work at all.

Well, yeah, it sort of does

[Anonymous No.6678716]

>>6678697
Isabelle and Ferdinand of Spain funded the construction of a synagogue. Definitively zionists.

[Anonymous No.6678721]

>>6678711
Tacoma bridge was built not checking its vibration stability.
It collapsed.
So we should drop the laws of statics.

[Anonymous No.6678724]

>>6678711
confirmed for absolute fucking moron.

>And according to you, it doesn't do any of that.
Where, for gods sake, did I say that the Christian moral code doesn't deter anyone from any immoral acts?


>Well, yeah, it sort of does
Right, brilliant. Let's also take away all criminal laws because crimes happen while we're at it.

[Anonymous No.6678732]

>>6678711
As an atheistfag I am truly ashamed of how shit this guy's arguments are. Please don't listen to him, Christfags. He is an idiot.

[Anonymous No.6678740]

>>6678732
I wouldn't be surprised if it was >>6678608 or >>6678615.

[Anonymous No.6678911]

And again christposters claim victory even though they drive away posters with their retardation.
A new challenger arises. Give me one reason why should I think that the laws of nature suspended because of some supreme being. Also, why is the myth that Jesus was a historical person is so embedded in christposters? You do know that there is no evidence for this except for "heard,said" accounts. Every "historian" work has been discredited, same as Shroud of Turin and every other relic presented. Not only that, but new studies from jewish archelogists conclude that the old testament is also bunk.
Also, there was never a population survey that requiered citizens to go back into their home towns, it was made up to fit into the prophecy. Amount of historical inacurracies is appaling, how do you christ fags deal with this, your book is the only thing you have and it took you 1600 years to perfect it into a decent form. How do you deal with the fact that most elements christianity has have been around long before it? How can you justify that every other Hindu / Buddhist is going to burn in hell for not being exposed to your religion, that the only purpose he has is to burn in eternal hell? How do you deal with the fact that God decided to come to the most remote corner on the planet and not somewhere civilised around river Indus or China?
Do you realize that invoking God doesnt solve any physical problems, even a as prime mover?
Explain your faith other than just "my mom and dad told me it is right,so it is right".

[Anonymous No.6678935]

>>6678911
Also, if God is the supreme being, couldnt he think of something more efficient to save the world from its sin? He sent his son, which is him, to Earth to die. Also, why then? What was the moment that pissed god so much that he decided to intervene, why then, why was he being indifferent for 150 000 years and then he decides to come by? Also, why do you think it is normal to value reason in every aspect of life ( your academic pursuits, commonsense knowledge ), but when it comes to your own mortality all is open. Isnt that biased, cant you see that feeble man is just afraid, he thinks that he is special but he is not.

[Anonymous No.6678947]

>>6678911
Do you think picking out parts of the bible which have been disproved is a compelling argument for the destruction of Christianity?

My mother and father are atheists.

>most elements christianity has have been around long before it?
If you're talking about morality, that might be true, but what's wrong with having a religion that enforces that moral code?

[Anonymous No.6678965]

>>6678947
>Do you think picking out parts of the bible which have been disproved is a compelling argument for the destruction of Christianity
Yes I do if that book is the centerpiece of Christianity
>what's wrong with having a religion that enforces that moral code
Leap of faith, apsolute moral authority that cannot be challenged from the outside, giving people false hope....

[Anonymous No.6678971]

>>6678947
Also, your "moral" code was real nice throught the history and you sure did enforce it on everyone

[Anonymous No.6678976]

>>6678947
That moral code includes killing a man, then confiding to a priest and praying your sins away?
Abolishing personal responsibility is not very moral, or is it, according to you?

[Anonymous No.6678977]

>>6678911
It's good to have read this because I have truly never seen this said and argued against! You have enlightened my o wise atheist!

[Anonymous No.6678984]

>>6678976
>implying repentance isn't based around taking responsibility for your actions
>implying confession isn't based around taking responsibility for your actions

[Anonymous No.6678986]

>>6678965
Spoiler: the vast majority of Christians aren't glued to the bible. So much of the contradictory and questionable nature of the Bible is filtered out by the Church. You've yet to tell me what harm these passages and stories do and why their destruction is a good thing.

An absolute, divine moral authority is a good thing. Without it authority can be questioned and flexed and bent. It won't necessarily be those with good intentions who bend the rules of morality either; it'll be whoever has the biggest guns or the most money.

[Anonymous No.6678987]

>>6678977
Being retarded is not going to help you. Why do you find comfort that you are nothing more that your whole existence is nothing more but a whim of a supreme being who is nothing more than a totalitarian dictator. He obliges you to love him and fear him and yet you find this moral or nice? Provide some reasoning my o wise shitposter!

[Anonymous No.6678996]

>>6678987
Why would I even try? Hundreds of people have done it before me, better than me. Even Elliot who is the man mentioned in the thread. You can go to thousands of books and considering how silly your arguments are and how you banalise Christian side the best I could do would be less useful than talking to a wall.
Go to them for answers, not an anonymous anime forum.

[Anonymous No.6679001]

>>6678971
If people did immoral things in the name of Christianity that is an argument that man is not great, not that god is not good.

[Anonymous No.6679006]

>>6678986
Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys. 2 Kings 2:23-25 NIV
"Take your son, your only son – yes, Isaac, whom you love so much – and go to the land of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains, which I will point out to you." (Genesis 22:1-18)
And no, you cannot ignore The Old Testament if you are a Christian. B-b-but my Jesus is sooo goood. Telling people to leave everything behind and follow him is somehow a good moral instruction?
>church doesnt have money and guns ( not talking about swiss guard but rednecks around the globe )
>An absolute, divine moral authority is a good thing
You do know that you dudes are the cucks of spirituality? You really think that you are so worthless that a supreme being must tell you what to do? Bonobo monkeyes exile those monkeyes who do "morally" unacceptable things as well as many animals. If you cannot know the difference from right or wrong you are not too bright, you suggest that you need a book or a divine deity to tell you what to do and that is completely unfounded.
>>6678984
>doing stupid shit and than praying to a bearded man in the clouds is taking responsibility

[Anonymous No.6679008]

>>6678144
>our times
>died in 1965
Nigga wut? At best, he was a writer of our great-grandparent's times.

[Anonymous No.6679018]

>>6679001
But God made you and you are nothing more than his puppet in this worldview and this is comforting to you? Yea, God is a cool dude, all those people who have not been in touch with religion will burn in hell for etenity although they are not guilty. If you think this is justifiable than I have nothing to discuss with you.

[Anonymous No.6679025]

>>6678911
Gota love when some random comes in with claims that
>And again christposters claim victory even though they drive away posters with their retardation.

and then proceeds to talk about stuff that hasn't been mentioned in the thread. You make me embarrassed to be an atheist.

[Anonymous No.6679029]

>>6678996
You cannot try because you know that you cannot convice someone who is empiricist without evidence evidence / reason. You have neither of those qualities on your side so you are not going to try. Also, there are tons of books on New Age spiritualism and that doesnt make it convicing or less wrong.

[Anonymous No.6679040]

>>6679006
>Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys. 2 Kings 2:23-25 NIV

Insulting a prophet is never a good idea.

>"Take your son, your only son – yes, Isaac, whom you love so much – and go to the land of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains, which I will point out to you." (Genesis 22:1-18)

I'm assuming you've never read Kierkegaard or any serious theology at all. In fact, I imagine your entire conception of Christianity is based off of skepticsbible.com or something.

>Telling people to leave everything behind and follow him is somehow a good moral instruction?

Yes, telling people to leave the world behind to follow God Himself is the best moral instruction.

>If you cannot know the difference from right or wrong you are not too bright, you suggest that you need a book or a divine deity to tell you what to do and that is completely unfounded.

Haven't you ever asked why some things are right and some things are wrong?

>doing stupid shit and than praying to a bearded man in the clouds is taking responsibility

Yes, acknowledging that you behaved poorly and asking for forgiveness is the definition of taking responsibility.

[Anonymous No.6679041]

>>6679025
I have read the thread, one dude was saying Christianity didnt have as much of influence as Roman / Greek values and another one was saying that the influence was bad. I see no quarrel with these statements and christposters in thread greatly ignored or cherrypicked through their posts to claim some moral victory even though they presented with absolutely no reasonable arguments.

[Anonymous No.6679047]

>>6679006
Well Isaac wasn't sacrificed. That's the whole idea of the story. Why else is it told?

Either way you've highlighted some more confusing stuff in the Bible. Well done. I didn't deny it was there in the first place. I doubt the Elisha story made it into many sermons though; that's the point I'm trying to make.

>church doesnt have money and guns ( not talking about swiss guard but rednecks around the globe )
I never said they did? Only that in a secular society without a divine authority that all men are answerable to the prevailing moral code is defined by those in power, corrupt or not.

>If you cannot know the difference from right or wrong you are not too bright
yeah, but, like, your Western conception of right and wrong is rooted in centuries of Christianity.

I am now starting to doubt your intelligence.

[Anonymous No.6679048]

>>6679018
>they are not guilty.

Everyone is guilty anon.

[Anonymous No.6679057]

>tfw even as an Atheist the Christfags have better arguments in this thread.

[Anonymous No.6679070]

>>6679040
> Kierkegaard
Prime example how you can be absolutely dumb as fuck and be praised for being a christposter.
Dude was living in fear of gods vengeance, he concluded that "classic" believers are low tier, unlike him. Dude believed in absolute subjectivism ( proved wrong by science ) and was the definition of an edgy fag. Pretentiousness and Bible metaphors dont make him intellectually great.
>Haven't you ever asked why some things are right and some things are wrong?
Yes I have, but I was never influenced by religous dogmatic systems of morality, unlike you.
>cknowledging that you behaved poorly and asking for forgiveness is the definition of taking responsibility.
No it is not, taking the heat for it is the definition of taking responisibility.
Morals and ethic systems do not require a supreme being, prove me wrong.

[Anonymous No.6679079]

>>6679070
>Yes I have, but I was never influenced by religous dogmatic systems of morality, unlike you.
AHAHAHA yes you were m8.

[Anonymous No.6679080]

>>6679070
>I was never influenced by religous dogmatic systems of morality, unlike you.
smh how are people this stupid.

[Anonymous No.6679089]

>>6679057
nice try Christfag
>>6679048
Isnt that perverted and utterly morally wrong?
Eastern sin is a laughable concept. "You cannot be like me puny human, I am so pure and awesome and always right even though you cannot see me and cannot communicate with me and last 300 years of methodological inquiry about the world point to the conclusion that I am not only arbitrary but probably nonexistent".

[Anonymous No.6679097]

>>6679089
>nice try Christfag
I forgot we are operating in the binary of the athetist mindset (i.e. you believe religion is the worst thing to happen to mankind or you're the worst). This is probably going to rock your world but it's possible to be an Atheist and still appreciate SOME aspects of Christian thought and to not DENY its influence on western culture.

[Anonymous No.6679098]

>>6679079
>>6679080
I meant to say I didnt get any clearer insight whether I was right or wrong from reading the Bible / commandments or some religious texts / dogmas. It came from commonsense and emphaty. You people really like cherrypicking, ignoring my posts and rambling and shitposting is all you like to do, isnt it?

[Anonymous No.6679100]

I think we can all agree that Kierkegaard was a shitty writer who projected way too hard.

[Anonymous No.6679104]

>>6679097
I didnt deny the influence nor I think that King James Bible isnt vital in formation of modern English literature, all I am saying that there is literally no reason to believe that Bible has some moral authority or that God is necessary for ethical systems.

[Anonymous No.6679107]

>>6679098
What do you mean from reading the bible? It doesn't matter if you read the Bible or not, it's a part of the culture you're raised in. Are you really surprised that you didn't get "any clearer insight" from the Bible when it was from that very book that most of your moral framework comes from anyway?

[Anonymous No.6679111]

>>6679070
>Dude was living in fear of gods vengeance

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom.
- Proverbs 9:10

>was the definition of an edgy fag. Pretentiousness and Bible metaphors dont make him intellectually great.

So sayeth anon!

>Yes I have

And what did you discover? Can you explain why some behaviors are morally right while other behavior is morally wrong? Doesn't there need to be some kind of external 'constant' that serves as a basis for defining what is moral? Wouldn't God be the most obvious 'constant' for defining what is moral?

>taking the heat for it

Acknowledging that you were wrong IS taking the heat for it.

>Morals and ethic systems do not require a supreme being, prove me wrong.

In order for objective morality to exist there must be an objective source for this morality. Given that the natural world is morally neutral (i.e. a monkey who kills another monkey is not behaving "immorally"), the objective source of morality must be of super-natural origin; morality must be from God.

[Anonymous No.6679114]

>>6679070
>Morals and ethic systems do not require a supreme being, prove me wrong.
You're right, they don't. Nobody ever said they did. The only issue is that without a divine authority keeping the system unalterable people will be able to alter it, sometimes for the worse. Why is this so hard to grasp?

[Anonymous No.6679115]

>>6679100
Man was a cuck of the highest order.
>left a girl
>girl married
>he got buttflustered, cause you know life is tough
>he is somehow a example of a Christian philosopher despite not making any sense and being a whiny little cunt

[Anonymous No.6679116]

>>6679089
>Isnt that perverted and utterly morally wrong?

Yes that is exactly what sin is.

>sin is a laughable concept.

Says the one sitting in the seat of mockers.

[Anonymous No.6679123]

>>6679098
The only reason reading religious teaching seemed unnecessary to you is because you live in a society with moral values defined by centuries of christianity. It's when the source of those valuse are forgotten and that morality starts to change for the worse that you'll find you learn something from them.

[Anonymous No.6679149]

>>6678554
More people were killed in 6 months of Jacobin Terror than during the 6 centuries of the Inquisition.