/lit/ - Literature

The argument basically takes the form:

>The bible is true because the bible said god said it was true

or simplified, the bible is true because the bible says the bible is true.


Did that clear things up?

>>15091788
No one ever says that though

>>15091822

The argument is, in it's essences the same, I just changed the wording to show you how it was circular.

You can see how the both the simplified and green-texted argument are circular, is that so?

>>15091847
>>15091814
>word salad
>doesnt even answer the question, merely restates it in a convoluted way

>>15091847
Believing that the Bible is true because of its contents is not the same as believing the Bible simply because the Bible says its true

>>15091890

What contents exactly make you believe that the bible is true? The content within the bible that says the bible is true?

If its not the contents within the bible, that says the bible is true, then what else could it possibly be?

>>15091788
The bible is generally reliable.
Miracles might be possible.
Read it. Prophecies come true. Wide attestation. Credibility increases. Character of apostles is reliable. Christ speaks with authority. Accept Christ.
The bible is true.
Eyes open.
The bible is inerrant.

Bumping for interest or for OP to drop some quotes

Is the Bible Inspired by God?: Silencing the Devil with R.C. Sproul and John Gerstner
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O122EHEr2cc

>>15092004
lol

>>15092121
What's wrong? We have more documented manuscripts for the bible than any other work of antiquity....

If you read it fairly you'll see there's nothing like it.

>>15092034
based.

>>15091876
Remember autistic people are incapable of understanding ironic humour
>>15091788
I think with Christians it’s more about the concept of faith and basically either opening your heart to god or having his faith wash over you depending on their particular beliefs, Calvinist or not etc. But what do I know I’m not a theologian or a Christian. The bible is a based work of literature regardless though. Also checked
>>15091822
Also yeah this only people you might hear say that are more passive NPC type Christians

>>15092034
>R.C. Sproul

Absolutely based

I just gave the New testament a chance, let it speak for itself, and treated it like a potentially reliable historical document since every serious scholar accepts the existence of Christ, as a man who taught spiritual truths around 30AD and was crucified by the jews/romans . The question remained, who was Jesus and was he trustworthy? The more I read the bible the more trustworthy Jesus became. So I accepted him as an honest man, but if I accepted him as honest then I'm compelled to accept the Old testament since he quoted from it and validated the ancient prophets. And by extension his apostles must be trustworthy since he gave them the great commission and duty to spread his message. And it seems like they did their job... And it all becomes self-authenticating in a way based on my trust in Jesus as an honest man. Then there are other details like prophecies coming to pass, the coherency of the text from the OT to the NT all fitting together really well...the worldview it presents is also the most coherent I've come across out of any other philosophy or religion. So why not?

>>15092307
>he opened his heart to god
Based

>>15091788
monad and a code of ethics eg. wash your feet; center left of that thumbnail looks like an animu female with outstretched arms to me, anyone else rorschaching what i'm rorschaching here

>>15092307
humility is all it takes. Unfortunately many have made a habit of arguing vehemently against God, and such a habit is not easy to break. They have made the deepest depths of their souls reject God, and they only make it worse by arguing online, where almost everyone is a bit more rude than normally. Woe to them all

>>15092446
I used to always argue against the existence of god on 4chan as well. Was always a massive dick about it too. I won’t larp as a christian but I do believe in god even if it isn’t exactly Jehovah so maybe there is hope yet for them

>>15092459
yeah, making a curvy path from atheism to Christianity through philosophies and occultism and spiritualism is definitely possible. Some people do things like nofap and begin to feel their spiritual selves and become open to God. But doing the same thing over and over, merely arguing with people online with passion, is useless. That doesn’t work for anyone on any topic. I engage in these discussions for the quiet ones lurking, not the atheists posting wojak greentexts. They have to seek the truth on their own.

>>15092459
>I won’t larp as a christian
doesn’t help your case when you say this lol

>>15092307
Based, im pretty much in the same boat. Good luck bro hope you find the truth.

>>15092479
>not the atheists posting wojak greentexts
Every time somebody responds with a pure green text post and wojak or Pepe or something of the sort you know immediately to discard their opinion. It feels like there aren’t quite lurkers who are earnest occasional posters anymore though. Everyone these days here seems to have a preconceived opinion set in stone that they will defend fervently and rudely. Also am I the only person who’s never felt much benefit from nofap? I mean I tried it once when I was an early adolescent coomer and it was nice to feel that sense of self control and discipline but ironically enough what really helped me find god was a marijuana habit. Not in some pseudo hippy way, but two years of living the exact lifestyle practically every religion talks against really made me realise how right they were. When I first turned atheist in school and didn’t have access to that lifestyle because was always the quiet kid I felt like the rejection of that hedonistic sort of lifestyle was stupid and irrational. But now I understand, and it’s hard to explain but naturally, slowly over that time more and more I started to accept god. From there returned the long lost desire to be disciplined and have that sense of austerity that a belief of something greater than oneself and ones ego affords. Excuse the blog

>>15092491
>you have to be Christian to believe in god

>>15092536
there’s no other God worth believing in. I wasn’t referring to any sort of deistic god that’s only reached by the mind and not the heart. Anyone can believe in causality

>>15092536
>>you have to be Christian to believe in god
technically true, everyone else is groping in the dark believing in the UNKNOWN GOD, as Paul would say. So we can lump deists, pantheists, muslims, hindus, mormons and platonists and non-christians together.

Christians believe in the living God, who revealed himself and incarnated on earth, who mediates man with his Son. Without Christ no one knows the Father.

>>15092599
By your definition, Mormons believe in the same God.

>>15092599
Muslims integrate much of Jewish and Christian doctrine into their religion. Saying belief in god is only valid if you believe that god personified himself into a man and came to earth is arbitrary and pretty ridiculous

>>15092558
>there’s no other God worth believing in
Your personal opinion is irrelevant to the question. Can you believe in god without being Christian? Yes, therefore the op is indeed a brainlet fag

>>15092626
“believing in God” has a different meaning than “believing in a god.” Let’s remember that God’s name is YHWH, and that’s what is signified by “God.” I was not referring to Allah or Zeus or anyone else but YHWH

>>15092307
Hey anon, I read the new testament too, and also found that Jesus said some very appealing things. He also says some things that are quite extraordinary and the force of his character is not enough to believe it. It seems more plausible to me that he was either delusional or lying. Now the only difference between our though processes seems to be a natural inclination to skepticism. Does this entail that the difference between believers and nonbelievers is their willingness to believe persuasive speakers?

>>15092648
>He also says some things that are quite extraordinary and the force of his character is not enough to believe it.
that’s why the rest of the Bible exists to give context

>>15092642
That is from a western judeo-Christian perspective though. Just because you were raised to think of that as THE default god doesn’t mean to everyone else any other god is simply A god. Also Muslims purport to believe in the same god as Christians and Jews, they are all “people of the book” you uneducated tard

>>15092660
>Also Muslims purport to believe in the same god as Christians and Jews, they are all “people of the book” you uneducated tard
only retarded NPC’s say this crap.

>>15092678
>knows nothing about the Quran or basic Muslim doctrine
>tries to comment about it nonetheless
>muh npcs

>>15092307
This is exactly how pyramid schemers recruit people. Showcase trustworthiness step by step until the victim in too deep. There's a literal psychological concept for this too, it's called the foot in the door phenomenon.

>>15092716
> But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Not the same god if your religions conflict with each other

>>15092307
how does god smiting people left and right transition into the new testament? I wonder if people have read the bible when they say these things, the OT is batshit and the NT only seems sane by comparison

>>15092658
Let's say I read the entirety of the NT and choice bits of the OT and was not convinced. I am comfortable with having to take the things on faith, you could argue that I take a lot if not everything on faith. The problem with the bible is that it is just not compelling enough to match its extraordinary claims. Is the only difference between believers and non-believers their willingness to trust?

>>15092479
Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven

>>15092731
Let me make it real simple for you since you pulled the first quote you could find on google
>Muslims believe in all the prophets of Judaism and believe in Jesus as prophets of god (allah)
>they believe the Quran is the most updated and the correct word of god since it came directly from god via Gabriel and transcribed perfectly by Mohammed
>they believe their god is the same god as that of Christians and Jews but main difference being that they they believe their scripture is the most correct since it was written by Gods final prophet and only by him, not a collection of works written by various authors and not directly written by one of the prophets as with the Torah and New Testament
So yes it is the same god you just a disagreement over scripture but I’m sure you’ll simplistically reduce that down to hurr no that means they don’t believe in the same god even though it’s literally directly said in the Quran

>>15092745
>it is just not compelling enough
What does this even mean?

>>15092626
Allah cannot interact with any part of creation, since even speaking to angels or man implies he has manifested in creation, in some respect. He cannot even speak or give revelation since his voice & Word are eternally a part of himself, and thus impotent to enter into creation.
There is nothing "like" him in creation, meaning we cannot make any meaningful and true statements about him, he is essentially the "Void" of nirvana, the Monad of the Greeks, except muslims try to anthropomorize him for religious purposes, not understanding how they contradict themselves in the process. Of course the Quran/hadiths are full of contradictions claiming he descends into heavens, but also he cannot enter into creation. Claiming there is nothing like him, then using analogies to say what he is like. How many right hands does he have? Except they are neither right, nor are they hands, nor are they "his".

Only the Triune God can be personal since his persons and energies transcend the world and are immanent in it, manifesting as the burning bush, walking with Adam in the garden, spirit hovering over the waters in genesis, and finally incarnating as Christ, etc...

>>15091788
Its justificatory status is no less than anything you think you believe in.. And also has the status of canon. Look a little closer

>>15092766
To clarify the last part of that third green text I mean that while the old and New Testament were written by various authors and not any of the prophets in each one, while Muslims believe the Quran was written by Mohammed, which is what makes it in their eyes the most legitimate word of god even though the old and New Testament are indirectly the word of god through what was written about prophets they do believe to be prophets of allah

>>15091788
The Bible says to test prophets by seeing if their predictions come true. E.g. that the Second Temple would be destroyed after the Messiah appeared. That the faith would spresd around the world aftrr that. That Hebrews would only remain in the Holy Land when they worshipped God etc.

>>15092626
I’ve found myself drawn into the Quran lately and from my experience is seems to be the faith of last resort. Natural considering Muhammad claimed to be the final prophet. It seems to act like the backstop or last pass for those who grapple with god, with simplified understanding and very direct messaging. I’m somewhat concerned that I have been relying on it at times, given what it appears to represent, but I hope that grace is still available to me.

>>15092774
>Allah cannot interact with any part of creation, since even speaking to angels or man implies he has manifested in creation, in some respect. He cannot even speak or give revelation since his voice & Word are eternally a part of himself, and thus impotent to enter into creation.
>There is nothing "like" him in creation, meaning we cannot make any meaningful and true statements about him, he is essentially the "Void" of nirvana, the Monad of the Greeks
This is bait right? I mean you don’t have to anything about Muslim doctrine but why do you insist on talking about it regardless and showing everyone how full of shit you are. I’m an ex Muslim, I used to be deeply religious, I actually had decent parts of the Quran memorised. You really don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about lmao

>>15092773
It means that the bible insufficiently supports its claim that the abrahamic god exists Jesus is the son of god.

>>15092725
Having a general foundation you build on, step by step, isn't a scheme, it's how education works. Inductive, scientific, historical and legal arguments are step-wise as well. We can't just argue mathematically about the past, we need to build a case.

OP wanted a way out of circularity, I provided my way.

>>15092794
Islam is unironically the most 4chan religion

>>15092795
>You don't know it, I'm ex-muslim and ....
Formulate an argument then and show us. And I will tear it down step by step.

>>15092804
4ch in the sense of /b/ retardation sure

>>15092774
Based as fuck

>>15092810
Here try reading again, I know it’s very hard for you
>>15092766
>>15092780

>>15092804
youre right. There is little love on 4chan

>>15092804
I find the dichotomy between Christ the perfect son and Muhammad the perfect man to be of some amusement. Almost like an internal dialectic between the child who yearns and the man who struggles to live up to the demands of that yearning, and can perhaps bring mercy and forgiveness in the same manner.

>>15092774
>mistaking belief in ubiquity of god for a god incapable of interacting with creation

> Claiming there is nothing like him, then using analogies to say what he is like
>taking things that literally even for the Quran
Only genuine autists think like this and take things THAT literally even for a religious text that is generally meant to be taken highly literally, no surprise you can’t tell the difference between when you should or shouldn’t though seeing what a flaming autist you are

>>15092826
you don't understand Islam's God or my argument against him. Read my post again if you want to address where I'm wrong, since you didn't specify anything.

>Christians and Muslims believe the same God
lmao
Muslims don't have the Trinity. Their God literally can't enter into creation, can't incarnate, can't manifest himself to people on earth, they consider it logically impossible and "beneath" God to do so. He is fully transcendent meaning he is forever locked outside of creation in his own bubble. The contradictions and problems that result from this are many, and muslims are too slow and thick to deal with them.

>>15092854
>Their God literally can't enter into creation, can't incarnate, can't manifest himself to people on earth, they consider it logically impossible and "beneath" God to do so. He is fully transcendent meaning he is forever locked outside of creation in his own bubble.
It sounds like you picked up a little superficial knowledge about Islam and completely misunderstood. If you bothered understanding my posts you’d understand why I’m wrong. But keep repeating the same incorrect, literally-taken interpretations of god being transcendental for god being “locked outside of creation”, literally the most retarded and misinformed take on the Islamic god I’ve seen in a while. Even /pol/fags don’t misunderstand Islam that badly. At least they don’t try and act as though they have some deep understanding of a particular part of allah’s nature which you have so clearly misunderstood because you take things far too literally

No religious text (Bible, Qu'ran, I Ching et al) is meant to be approached from a scientific-rational perspective, but rather are meant to be approached by someone who is *interested* in the text a priori, and who, although skeptical, is willing to give the text some benefit of the doubt.

That is, one must assume that the text holds some value, and have **faith** that what is presented is true in some sense. Many texts present ideas that are obviously not in concordance with our every day experience, and the reader/audience is expected (again, through faith) to reconcile this difference with his belief that the text is in some larger sense, true

Only autists approach these things from a purely "rational" perspective

>>15092850
Islam was catered to deny the incarnation and manifestation of God in creation, but they went too far and imprisoned him in his own transcendence beyond the heavens and the world, beyond all creation.
This is an old problem, I didn't discover it. And it creates many contradictions in their scripture, and their theology. It's unresolved.

>>15092878
so...are you gonna address his argument or just tell him he’s wrong?

>>15092878
>ad hominem
>muh pol
>more ad hominem
So you have no reply or argument, you're just mad and don't know how to express yourself.


> If you bothered understanding my posts you’d understand why I’m wrong.
I did, and I do understand why you're wrong. Indeed.

>>15092854
Also Allah spoke to Moses though I’m not surprised you didn’t know that since it doesn’t fit into your narrow, incredibly literal interpretation of a small part of Islamic doctrine which you’ve applied to the entire concept of Allah to fit your neat little narrative
>>Christians and Muslims believe the same God
No dumbass I said Muslims believe that their god is the same god that sent down Jesus not that Christians believe in the same god as Muslims and that Muslims believe in the exact same concept of god that Christians do but once again you take things incredibly literally and misinterpret them what a surprise

>>15092884
So what do your beliefs actually look like in practice?

>>15092902
>>15092898
>>15092891
See >>15092907 >>15092766 >>15092780

>>15092907
oh wow! Yahweh created the universe too! Just like Allah! Let’s all go to the mosque this Sunday because it makes no difference!

>>15092922
>can’t understand the difference between Muslims believing that Allah sent down Jesus and all the Judaic prophets and saying that Christians, Jews, and Muslims all believe in the same god

>>15092034
>ligioner ministries spamming anon

Mahmoud was too dumb to call God properly by His four letter name. Why would God suddenly just drop that name and never utter it again in His supposed final revelation?

>>15092891
Not OP, but I could agree with this interpretation. Given my post about Islam as a last resort, and it’s necessity of demanding obedience such that detail becomes less necessary than harder truth. Not everybody needs revelation at the level of Christ, in fact, It’s almost self evident that it is largely impossible (at least in current times), and that a more definite form is sufficient for most.

>>15092907
>Also Allah spoke to Moses though I’m not surprised you didn’t know that since it doesn’t fit into your narrow,
Yes the muslims borrow that story from us, but it doesn't make any sense in their theology and if you ask them "how" such a dialogue is possible, given Allah's absolute transcendence, they have no reply, (google it and you'll see!).... because Allah cannot enter into creation and talk to anyone, that means his properties cannot either, his voice can't enter, his image can't enter....
So the only solution is that Moses had a virtual experience, an illusion of Allah, he never spoke with Allah himself, and thus he can never have true faith that the message is reliable, since it's divorced from Allah ontologically, could just be a djinn or demon or hallucination, because it literally CAN'T be Allah.

In Christianity we don't have that problem because God not only CAN enter into creation logically but DOES, he is both transcendent and immanent. So Moses speaking to the burning bush, or Adam talking to God in the garden are logically coherent.

>>15092902
>has no reply or argument
>just says yes I understood and you’re wrong
Kek the irony

>>15092935
>can’t understand the difference between Muslims believing that Allah sent down Jesus and all the Judaic prophets and saying that Christians, Jews, and Muslims all believe in the same god
already forgetting what you said earlier?
>>15092660
> Also Muslims purport to believe in the same god as Christians and Jews, they are all “people of the book” you uneducated tard

>>15092942
>ligioner ministries
Thanks I'll check them out some more

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

Here's a good debate, Orthodox Christian runs circles around Islamic Paul. Paul can't explain the properties and transcendence of Allah either...funny stuff

>>15092964
That second point does not contradict with the first it’s just that the Muslim concept of that god is different, but they still purport it to be the same god.
>>15092959
Just because you keep repeating that same line about god being transcendental and therefore incapable of communicating with creation doesn’t mean it’s right
>he’s a Christfag
Ah it makes sense now why you keep repeating the same line again and again in circular reasoning thinking it makes you right
>borrowed it from us
>a story in turn borrowed from the jews
Kek

>>15092983
>That second point does not contradict with the first it’s just that the Muslim concept of that god is different, but they still purport it to be the same god
what am I reading lmao just stop

>>15092910
I'm not religious... I'm much closer to one of the "autists" I mention. I've always had a tough time reconciling religious truth with my understanding of the material universe (I work as an engineer).

Nevertheless, it gradually dawned on me that just as some people have no "ear for music", I couldn't confidently say that I didn't lack some capacity for religious belief. This was further underscored once I started looking into the biological underpinnings of religion

If I can be said to have any "belief", it's this: I can see an appreciate the order and structure of the universe, and understand this as a sublime beauty. Perhaps it's just pride, but I find myself unable to truly appreciate this beauty or understanding of creation except by my own labor, and generally reject dogma imposed by others in terms of what I *should* believe

>>15092957
If I believe in the revelation of Christ then I necessarily believe in the supremacy of the God of Israel and his promise to his people. In my opinion this actually offers a broad political solution to modern capital in that by agreeing that allah is the one true God, an ascended class of Judaic/Christian aristocracy can rule and pay jizyah through access to basic capital goods ie, food, clothing, education etc. By affirming the belief and providing necessities we will receive a broad class of worker drones that can man factories etc but will demand relative equality in labour markets.

>>15092910
I was raised as a protestant, so my beliefs tend to be largely shaped around that. Again though, I really tend to reject dogmatic interpretation instead of forming my own relationship with the divine

>>15092983
>Just because you keep repeating that same line about god being transcendental and therefore incapable of communicating with creation doesn’t mean it’s right
The implications are clear and they have no way to untie the knot. Neither do you since you can't address the points I present specifically, or find a logical flaw with my reasoning.

>>a story in turn borrowed from the jews
The OT and NT are complete together and Christians have the only credible claim to either.
Muslims cherry pick what they like, claiming the OT is corrupted in many parts and unreliable, the implication is that God cannot preserve his own revelation and teachings of his prophets. Jews likewise cherry pick it because of their Talmud. All are inconsistent.

>>15093001
If you believed in Christ you would understand that Christ was both the fulfillment of the covenant with Israel and start of a covenant with the rest of humanity

>>15092987
Sorry you have such a hard time understanding subtleties anon, it’s no wonder you have such a hard time understanding the nature of Allah according to Islamic doctrine and reduce it to the simplest terms that fit your beliefs. Muslims belief that god is both transcendent and immanent. Nothing in the scripture would contradict either but you seem to want to reduce it to him being purely transcendent and ignoring everything else in the scripture that suggests he is also immanent. You ignore the omnipotence and omnipresence frequently talked about in the Quran. You have one of the dumbest takes on Islam I have ever seen and let me tell you with the people I know, that is truly impressive

>>15093018
I assume as a good Muslim you know and can read Arabic, as all translations of the Qu'ran are imperfect?

>>15093012
>or find a logical flaw with my reasoning.
Your reasoning is not based on any evidence. It is based on a simple misunderstanding of one of the most basic parts of Islam. You provide no real justification for why you think Islam describes god as being explicitly non immanent and incapable of interacting with creation when he is characterised as both immanent and transcendent, omnipresent, omnipotent, both being nowhere and everywhere, etc. You just keep repeating the same misconception and keep ignoring the fact that it simply doesn’t hold up to what the scripture actually says about Allah.

>>15093015
There is no Greek or Jew, but why did Christ call the woman of Canaan a dog? The bible is as racist as it gets mate, it doesn’t mean hate, just god placing his people in their proper role.

>>15093023
>you know and can read Arabic
Yes I was taught it in Arabic from nursery all the way to graduating from high school. I am from an Arabic-speaking country, currently doing my postgrad at a uk uni though

>>15092307
Jesus didn’t write the bible

>>15093030
Heh. This is one of my problems with universalist religion.

Personally I'm more comfortable with the Germanic-influenced Christianity of the middle ages than I am with the Pauline form

>>15093030
google it, you’ll find plenty of answers

>>15093023
>>15093035
Also like I said I’m no longer Muslim

>>15093035
Ah ok. Some of the most ignorant takes on Islam I ever heard were from someone I knew from Malaysia. I studied classical Arabic and literature in uni and was really shocked at how little this individual knew about their own religion except through various preachers they were familiar with

>>15093050
ah ok. Wasn't really commenting on your posts except I was curious whether or not you were truly familiar with the source material

>>15093027
>explicitly non immanent and incapable of interacting with creation
his transcendence is a fundamental belief to Islam, like his oneness.

Why do they argue against the incarnation of Christ? On what grounds? Because not only do they think it *didn't* happen, but they think it's logically *impossible*, since the finite cannot contain the infinite, since in their theology Allah is fully transcendent and infinite there "is nothing like unto him in creation" Quran 42:11-12; This stems from their misunderstanding of God and transcendence. And they argue pointlessly because of this fatal flaw, whether he can talk to creatures, whether he has two right hands, whether he goes in and out of the heavens....they are totally confused
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7I-cek2hMU

>>15093038
Holy Spirit wrote it through the apostles and prophets.

>>15093044
I’m offering direct biblical interpretation. The woman herself acknowledged her lower status and Christ blessed her for her faith. What he did not do is suggest that the claims belonging to the seed of Israel are passed to anyone who simply begs.

>>15093060
>how little this individual knew about their own religion except through various preachers they were familiar with
Thats no surprise at all. “Word of mouth” so to speak Muslims often are the most clueless about their religion. We’ve got many of them in my country as well, and when you combine that with preachers that don’t really known what they’re talking about and inject a heavy dose of personal interpretation and you’ve got a real cocktail for ignorance
>>15093074
>his transcendence is a fundamental belief to Islam, like his Oneness
And so is his immanence. liferally nothing you’ve said actually contradicts this or “refutes” allah’s ability to communicate. I don’t care about your Christian beliefs and your resultant attitudes towards Islam as a result of them. The discussion was merely about Islamic doctrine itself. And nothing you’ve said contradicts my main points: that Muslims believe their god is the same one that sent down Christ and the Judaic prophets (with the differences arising in what they believe are perversions in scripture as a result of the OT and NT not being directly transcribed from the word of god by one of his prophets) and that God is not “locked out of” existence as you’ve ridiculously claimed

>>15093113
>with the differences arising in what they believe are perversions in scripture as a result of the OT and NT not being directly transcribed from the word of god by one of his prophets
Islam arose in 600 AD. For centuries, the OT and NT existed as they were. How did Muslims just decide to get rid of certain parts? Why did Allah take so long to correct these mistakes?

>>15093096
I imagine that it is normal to experience visceral denial and rejection upon realisation that your faith is nothing more than elaborately constructed mass hypnosis to protect a line of genetic data. But eventually it gives way to an understanding of the beauty in it and Gods creation. It starts to make sense, and the words begin to jump of the page at you. God loved us all so much that he gave us this knowledge so we may be saved, personally, and when he brings his final times upon us.

>>15093152
Idk ask god. As I said I am no longer a Muslim. Don’t expect me to justify things that don’t make sense, I will merely correct anons who blatantly misunderstand parts of Islamic doctrine. Though the going explanation is that god chose to reveal his scripture slowly and gradually step-wise as humanity became more and more ready for his final scripture. Why such a large gap? Why such a large gap between the OT and NT? It’s because none of it is really true

Why are Muslims so eager to say they worship the same god that Christians do? Makes no sense

>>15093113
>And so is his immanence. liferally nothing you’ve said actually contradicts this or “refutes” allah’s ability to communicate.
So me where Islam teaches God can incarnate and enter into creation, that there are things like Allah in creation.

The only group that allows immanence or ontological omnipresence are sufis, and most are considered heretical by orthodox sunnis.

Otherwise we have two extremes: the Ismails which accept literal transcendence and can't even talk about God's properties properly, and the Salafi, who take the Quran very literally and when they happen on internal contradictions they just say "I dunno, only God knows":

*Isma'ilism - Shia

According to Isma'ilism, God is absolutely transcendent and unknowable;[60] beyond matter, energy, space, time, change, imaginings, intellect, positive as well as negative qualities. All attributes of God named in rituals, scriptures or prayers refers not to qualities God possesses, but to qualities emanated from God, thus these are the attributes God gave as the source of all qualities, but God does not consist on one of these qualities* ...

Salafism and Wahhabism

Salafism and Wahhabism refuse interpretations on Quran to avoid altering of its message, thus taking the descriptions of God literally and oppose widespread theological concepts including the Ash'ari view. Therefore, descriptions such as "God's hands" or "sitting on (above) a throne, should be taken at their linguistic meaning, without asking how, as it is regarded as the only possibility to understand God's attributes.

>>15093212
without theology you're barely above animal or vegetable state.

>>15093226
Lmao you literally don’t know what immanence is. Allah is supposed to encompass all of creation and non creation since he exists outside of creation. That does not mean he is locked outside of creation
>I donno only god knows
Kek Christians use the god works in mysterious ways line in so many contexts. You just can’t admit that both religions are similarly nonsensical somyoure trying desperately to try to find some huge logical inconsistency in Islam that in your mind will make it completely refutable while the bible somehow to you makes more sense despite the litany of contradictions that exist within it (often very similar to the ones that exist in the Quran)

>>15093234

>>15093226
>>15093251
Meant to say he exists both outside and within creation simultaneously but he is not “within” it since he is everywhere and nowhere at the same time. If this to you doesn’t make sense but the bible does then you are on some serious cognitive dissonance my friend

>>15093085
says who?

>>15093212
what a tool lmao

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

Go to 40mins, dude sets out a good argument against isalmic Allah.

>>15093270
>>15093251

see >>15093320

I believe in Christ.
I do not believe in Muhammad.
One was and is God incarnate.
The other had a bad reading in Christian theology.

>>15093320
>linking to some irrelevant christfag
Religion fags on this board are so pathetic lmao. Islam, Christianity, Judaism, etc. It’s all the same. Just because you nitpick one part of this religion and say it doesn’t make sense doesn’t magically make all the inconsistencies and problems in the other religions go away

>>15093328
t. vegetative hylic

>>15093328
>Islam, Christianity, Judaism, etc. It’s all the same.

>>15093325
>telling me to watch some random Christian defending the concept of his made up god against the concept of another made up god
No thanks anon, I was born and raised into Islam, studied it at school for something like 12 years, memorised parts of it like a good Muslim boy and because for a time I was deeply religious as a result of my mother. You fail to understand the nature of Allah. You think his transcendence contradicts his immanence but that is a fundamental failure to understand one of the most basic aspects of his nature which I’ve explained again and again. You misunderstand this because you are yourself a Christian. I’m done wasting my time trying to make you understand something you clearly have a very biased one-sided knowledge of

>>15093333
Checked but yes they are very similar. Care to explain how they aren’t the same? What is it about the OT or NT or Quran that makes one of them so above the others or contain some impressive truth not present in the others or really differentiates one from the other in any significant way beyond small religious differences

>>15093339
Atheist islamism is mega cringe.

>>15093356
>the Holy Trinity, the incarnation, the two natures of Christ
>small religious differences

>>15093360
>atheist islamism

>>15093339
immanence, omnipresence, manifestation aren't taught literally in Islam, Allah himself doesn't enter into creation, it's a sufi thing. What muslim scholars (non-sufi) argue that Allah is immanent in his creation? What source do they appeal to hadith, surah, etc? show me

>>15093368
>this made up nonsense about the nature of god is different to this other made up nonsense about the nature of god!
I said actually significant differences that makes one of those religions somehow above the others. Everybody knows about the basic differences in doctrine

>>15093372
>omnipresence not taught in quran
First thing that popped up on google since it’s late and I’m tired. And there are many other references to god being everywhere and nowhere

>>15093384
>>the Holy Trinity, the incarnation, the two natures of Christ
>made up nonsense

>>15093409
>hates homosexuals
>posts pics of faggy cartoons made for children

>>15093409
>Vishnu, Shiva, Devi
>made up nonsense

>>15093414
Most of the “Christians” on this board are larpers in it for a fake sense of purpose and unironicslly the aesthetic ignore that fag

>>15093372
>Allah doesn’t enter into creation
>speaks to Moses
>speaks to Adam
>speaks to Mohammed

>>15093481
>Quran makes mutually exclusive claims
Yep.
Grats, you found a contradiction in Islam.

>>15093496
>still can’t point out any evidence of mutual exclusivity between the nature of god as described in the Quran and instances speaking to prophets

>>15091788
Throughout time, skeptics have regarded the Bible as mythological, but archeology has confirmed it as historical. Opponents have attacked its teaching as primitive and outdated, but its moral and legal concepts and teachings have had a positive influence on societies and cultures throughout the world. It continues to be attacked by pseudo-science, psychology, and political movements, yet it remains just as true and relevant today as it was when it was first written. It is a book that has transformed countless lives and cultures throughout the last 2000 years. No matter how its opponents try to attack, destroy, or discredit it, the Bible remains; its veracity and impact on lives is unmistakable. The accuracy which has been preserved despite every attempt to corrupt, attack, or destroy it is clear testimony to the fact that the Bible is truly God’s Word and is supernaturally protected by Him. It should not surprise us that, no matter how the Bible is attacked, it always comes out unchanged and unscathed. After all, Jesus said, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Mark 13:31).

>>15093372
>>15093496
>No one has ever seen God (1 John 4:12).
>No man has seen or can see [God] (1 Timothy 6:16).

>>15093320
>>15093496
>>15093531
>The Lord appeared to Abraham near the great trees of Mamre while he was sitting at the entrance to his tent in the heat of the day (Genesis 18:1).
>The Lord would speak to Moses face to face, as one speaks to a friend (Exodus 33:11).
Lmao

>>15093504
There is nothing like unto him in creation. Nothing Can Be Compared To Allah and he is far above how people ascribe anthropomorphism to Him. This is a core belief in islam.

So whatever Moses spoke to was not literally Allah. Otherwise there would be something in creation like unto him, it would be a form of manifestation or incarnation.

The general consensus is that it was a dream-like vision, a "figurative" speaking, one hadith says Allah put "words" in a tree and Moses heard the sounds.

>>15093554
And that contradicts his immanence and locks him out creation of because? And what you’re talking about there is the burning bush dumbass, not unique to Islam. Also
>>15093531
>>15093539
Contradictions don’t get any more direct than that

>>15093528
>it always comes out unchanged and unscathed.
That must be why it has several translations

>>15093562
>And what you’re talking about there is the burning bush dumbass, not unique to Islam.
The burning bush is coherent in christianity because we accept theophanies of God, we accept that there can appear things "like unto him" in creation, if he chooses to enter it. In Islam this is strictly forbidden so they can rule out the incarnation of Christ.
But in ruling out the incarnation of Christ they make things like the burning Bush only figurative,not a literal dialogue of Moses with God. Likewise for Adam talking to Allah, it becomes incoherent.

If they allow for Allah's immanence then they concede ground for the Incarnation of Christ. Which is fine for me, but muslim scholars and apologists don't like doing that, only sufis do that.

I question why there's little discussion on /lit/ in regards to Hermeticism and it's synthesis with Christianity. From a theological and philosophical standpoint, I feel as though looking at things like alot of the Old Testament (specifically the metaphor and symbology behind the Garden of Eden) through the lens of Hermetic thought, while at the same time doubling back and giving the Hermetica a completely new context when looked at through what Jesus spoke of the New Testament (Parable of the Talents and the Holy Trinity as a representation of God's investment into the world).
It's a legitimately interesting field of religious thought to study, and I'm glad I fell assbackwards into Christian Hermeticism.

>>15093562
>Contradictions don’t get any more direct than that
Those don't contradict our theology at all. The appear contradictory because you cherry pick them out of their context, which anyone can do to anything, any book, any religion, any legal system, since their meaning is obscured by cherry picking.

The issue I raised is not the same, I'm not cherry picking verses and putting them against each other, I'm talking about the implications of their theology and apologetics.

>>15093614
This is next level cope

>>15093608
Dammit forgot to proofread
>>when looked at what Jesus spoke of the New Testament make for much more fulfilling answers, I feel

>>15093608
There's no need to obfuscate the bible with external heresies like the hermetics. It's already complex enough, if you want good expositions just refer to the early church fathers, and if you let it speak for itself you'd see it stands on its own.

>>15093600
Based bro

>>15092238
>NPC type Christians
implying they don't count because you don't agree with there point of view.
Most Christians are "NPC". They therefor have a better clam of what is a canon argument than you. (as there is no scientific method to prove the existence of God)

>>15093608
>I feel
Based... I too am a subjectivist heretic who feels that the church guided by the Holy Spirit is just too stupid to see how hermeticism should be considered canon and true teaching.......

>>15093624
I could see that, and agree deeply that there is a rich tradition and exposition that can be found within the early fathers, but I feel as though many of their contemporary theologians where correct when they named Hermes Trismestigus as a contemporary of Moses/Pagan wiseman who spoke of Jesus (by way of the Logos/Word descending into flesh) in a roundabout way. This not to say that the Bible does not stand on it's own with the proper study, but I feel there is merit in baptizing Hermeticism, so to speak.

>>15093600
>>15093614
>this is strictly forbidden to rule out the incarnation of Christ
Kek no you don’t need to rule out immanence to rule out incarnation. Incarnation of Christ is ruled out on the basis that no one is “born” there are only creations of god. It is also ruled out on the basis that it is a perversion of god and Christ’s teachings. If this is what you’re basing your entire argument on then you seriously need to do some more reading rather than coming up with assumptions

>>15093663
Born of god*
>>15093614
>muh cherry picking
Please explain how that is not a direct contradiction rather than coping so hard

>>15093643
Eastern Orthodoxy is still one of the most based and redpilled remaining churches (specifically the Copts and Armenians), but I would be untruthful if I did not say that something within the Hermetics does not have a powerful draw to me to the degree of drawing out that which is compatible with Christianity.

>>15093663
Born of god*
>>15093614
>muh cherry picking
Please explain in what world is that not a direct contradiction instead of coping so hard

>>15093608
>>15093674

Chapter 1. That the Deity is incomprehensible, and that we ought not to pry into and meddle with the things which have not been delivered to us by the holy Prophets, and Apostles, and Evangelists.

No one has seen God at any time; the Only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him. The Deity, therefore, is ineffable and incomprehensible. For no one knows the Father, save the Son, nor the Son, save the Father. Matthew 11:27 And the Holy Spirit, too, so knows the things of God as the spirit of the man knows the things that are in him. 1 Corinthians 2:11 Moreover, after the first and blessed nature no one, not of men only, but even of supramundane powers, and the Cherubim, I say, and Seraphim themselves, has ever known God, save he to whom He revealed Himself.

God, however, did not leave us in absolute ignorance. For the knowledge of God's existence has been implanted by Him in all by nature. This creation, too, and its maintenance, and its government, proclaim the majesty of the Divine nature. Wisdom 13:5 Moreover, by the Law and the Prophets in former times and afterwards by His Only-begotten Son, our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ, He disclosed to us the knowledge of Himself as that was possible for us. All things, therefore, that have been delivered to us by Law and Prophets and Apostles and Evangelists we receive, and know, and honour , seeking for nothing beyond these. For God, being good, is the cause of all good, subject neither to envy nor to any passion. For envy is far removed from the Divine nature, which is both passionless and only good. As knowing all things, therefore, and providing for what is profitable for each, He revealed that which it was to our profit to know; but what we were unable to bear He kept secret. With these things let us be satisfied, and let us abide by them, not removing everlasting boundaries, nor overpassing the divine tradition Proverbs 22:28 .

>Read Matthew
>Like the prophets said, the messiah would be named Immanuel!
>Ah behold, and the child was named Jesus, thus fulfilling the prophecy!
>there was no messianic prophecy about this
literally what did he mean by this?

>>15093708
>Immanuel, meaning "God is with us"
>NOOOO YOU CANT HAVE PROPHECIES BE METAPHORICAL BUT POINTING TO A LITERAL TRUTH!!!!

>>15093714
>OKAY SOME THINGS ARE METAPHORICAL BUT NOT MY HECKIN FLESH BREAD!
>IT'S NOT A SYMBOL!!! IT PHYSICALLY TURNS INTO JESUS BUT NOT BY A WAY DISCERNIBLE TO THE SENSES IT IS ONLY DISCERNIBLE BY THE INTELLECT IF YOU ARE TOLD IT IS!!

>>15093714
> anything untrue or nonsensical is metaphorical
>anything that isn’t is literal and the truth

>>15093663
>Incarnation of Christ is ruled out on the basis that no one is “born” there are only creations of god. It is also ruled out on the basis that it is a perversion of god and Christ’s teachings.
You don't understand his point. The teaching you accept is based on the worldview you assume, if you accept the bible as the revealed word of God then the incarnation follows just fine, and the theology supports it.
If you accept the Quran then the incarnation is denied by its revelation.
The issue muslims raise when talking to Christians is that the Incarnation is not only "against the Quran" but against Logic itself because it would be impossible for the Infinite to be subsumed in the Finite, it would be impossible for God to lower himself into creation, into a creature, is what they argue etc.

Obviously if you tell a Christian "the incarnation didn't happen because the Quran say so" it's not going to convince him or matter, since the Qu'ran is a false gospel for us. So muslims try to bridge the gap by denying God's immanence, "nothing is like unto him" in creation, which is what their religion actually teaches. But then logical problems follow, as was shown earlier, since his ability to communicate and make himself known to creatures (whether angel or man) relies on immanence.

>>15092945
God said not to use that name

>>15093745
>>15093762

>NOOOOOOOOOOO EVERYTHING HAS TO BE A HECKIN METAPHOR EVEN WHEN JESUS USES VERY HARSH GREEK WORDS LIKE ΦΆΓΕΤΕ REFERING TO CONSUMING THE BREAD LIKE YOU WOULD TO LITERAL FOOD AND MEAT AND NOT A SYMBOL WE CANT JUST LOOK AT THE TEXTERINO AND TRADITIONERINO TO SEE WHATS A METAPHORINO AND WHAT IS A LITERILINO!!!!!!! NOOOOO ALL OF THE EARLY CHURCH WAS FRICKIN WRONG ON THIS!!!!!!!

>>15093762
>NOOO YOU JUST DONT GET IT MODERN SCIENCE FRICKIN SHOWS THAT A MAN CANNOT DIE AND THEN RISE FROM THE DEAD THAT IS HECKIN UNLOGICAL!!!

>>15093152
In the 4th century, "All the synagogues of the East follow the Gospel of the Nazoreans" and they also had a different version of the Torah.

>>15093772
>against Logic
Logic does not exist as some neutral bugman empirical apparatus apart from God. So they only have their false revelation to argue with.

>>15093772
You do not understand immanence. The Quran does not deny gods immanence nor does it contradict. Muslims do not deny gods immanence it is literally one of the fundamental concepts (that Allah encompasses everything including the material world). Yes it denies incarnation on the basis that a man cannot come directly from god (as I said cannot be born of god only created by him) but that does not exclude gods immanence or his ability to enter or influence the material world, especially an omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient god. That simply makes no sense

>>15093772
This^
i've seen plenty of debates between muslims and sikhs, muslims and hindus, where the muslim denies Allah's Omnipresence "in the world" and by extension particular immanence "in the world"...they say it's figurative.

If you say God is omnipresent the muslims first response is to ask you "is your God in my toilet?? Is he in my poop?!" and then they high five each other thinking they won the debate.

>>15093496
All it says is "there is nothing like unto him"

>>15093783
Where does he say that?

>>15093800
Who are you quoting anon?

>>15093800
>He thinks the argument is that they metaphorically ate the bread

>>15093811
The Quran even says God could have a son if he chose.

>>15093812
Must be some pretty misinformed Muslims then

>>15093828
>NOOOOOOOO YOU CANT JUST EAT THE FLESH AND DRINK THE BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST THAT IS SO.... SO HECKIN WRONG!

>>15093831
The Quran says he is omnipotent. Theoretically he can do whatever he wants. That anons absolute insistence that Allah according to the Quran cannot manifest or incarnate himself materially is absurd

Why does the last supper make people seethe this hard? It's almost like Christ was actually divine and knew exactly what to say to divide the atheist bugman from the believer.

>>15093819
In the old testament it says not to use his name in vain

>>15093839
There are even human-like metaphors of God in the Quran, its not literal.

"God hears", God authoring a book etc.

>>15093856
Really it’s my bad for wasting my time on someone that literally has no knowledge of basic quranic doctrine and was basing his entire argument on his own religious beliefs

>>15093836
Lol you don't even know my position on the matter. Transubstantiation is the most retarded position one could possibly have on the Lord's Supper. The fact that you rush to defend it is laughable to me.

>>15093861
>quranic doctrine
It's worth about as much as a roll of toilet paper to me, maybe even less.

>>15093861
I'm someone else. All the Quran says is "There is nothing like unto Him"

>>15093867
Preaching to the choir buddy, might as well throw in Christian and Judaic doctrine as well

>>15092459
well you better hope God forgives you, because I sure don't.
Remember that denying the holy spirit is the one unforgivable sin, and you spread as a joke. I hope it was worth the laughs.

>>15093868
Yes I know I was talking about the other anon who took that line and applied in the most literal and stretched it in the most retarded assumptive way possible

>>15093862
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WHY DID CHRIST MAKE IT SO THAT I HAVE TO EAT HIS FLESH TO GET INTO HEAVEN THAT IS LIKE... SO FRICKING AND HECKIN UNHYGENIC! ITS PURELY SYMBOLIC LIKE NO.... JESUS JUST MEANT IT SYMBOLICALLY BUT PEOPLE TOOK IT LITERALLY AND LEFT AND HE DIDNT FRICKINH CORRECT THEM CAUSE... YOU KNOW... ITS A HECKIN SYMBOL!!!!!

>>15093877
wrong again, retard

Who keeps making these threads and why does he hate God so much? Is it a mod?

>>15093871

>>15093883
>NOOOO YOU DONT GET IT CHRIST WAS TALKING PURELY IN SYMBOLS AND PEOPLE JUST FRICKIN MISUNDERSTOOD HIM!!!

>>15093869
>might as well throw in Christian and Judaic doctrine as well

>there is only transubstantiation and memorialism

>>15093811
> The Quran does not deny gods immanence nor does it contradict.

**The Danger of Immanence concept***, fast forward to 12:30. He argues that transcendence excludes immanence, logically. And many muslim scholars, apologists and debaters use the same reasoning to attack Christianity...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xH-2wyBnjos&t=12m30s

>>15093903
>NOOO YOU DONT GET IT LIKE THE BREAD *REPRESENTS* THE FLESH ITS LIKE... NOT *LITERALLY* THE FLESH AND CHRIST HIMSELF ... YEAH HE DIDNT SAY IT BUT ITS FRICKIN TRUE JUST LOOK AT MODERN SCIENCE!!!

>>15093898
>NOOO THIS RELIGION FULL OF CONTRADICTIONS AND NONSENSICAL SHIT IS BETTER THAN THIS OTHER RELIGION FULL OF CONTRADICTIONS AND NONSENSICAL SHIT

>>15093833
Those verses are explained away, Allah is not in creation but his knowledge is, meaning he knows all and sees all, so his 'omnipresence' gets reduced to omniscience, there is a strong divide between creation and Allah. They do not let him enter into creation, not in part, not in whole, not in any way besides figurative knowing....
Here is another guy denying it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ueqLGfyVG8

>>15093909
Why go to preachers when you can go straight to the source? >>15093833

>why yes, I communicate solely using soijack memes, how could you tell?

>>15093916
>NOOOO GOD DOESNT EXIST ALL RELIGION ARE LIKE... DRAWING ON THE SAME TRUTH! I PREFER EASTERN TEACHING!! THEY ALIGN WITH TRUE EMPIRICAL SCIENCE AND PROVEN THEORIES LIKE EVOLUTION!! WE ARE ALL JUST TRAVELLING ON A WARM BALL OF EARTH AND REINCARNATING WHILE DOING YOGA!!!

>>15093923
In Islam you can't just take the Quran and interpret it subjectively, you have to go to the "consensus of the scholars" I'm telling you what mainstream sunni muslims are taught and what they argue.

Shia have their own problems as well.

>>15093925
>ITS A FRICKING SYMBOL AND NOT LITERAL WHY DO YOU HECKIN NOT GET THAT? HE DIDN"T MEAN IT LIKE THAT PEOPLE MISUNDERSTOOD HIM!!

How do you argue against Solipsism without circular reasoning?

>>15093909
"There is nothing like God" like
"There is nothing like Superman". Its valid even if Superman drinks water like other people do

>>15093934
>NOOO I AM THE ONLY ONE WHO EXISTS YOUR ALL JUST A MAYA GENERATED ILLUSION!!! WE ARE FRICKIN EVOLVED ANIMALS AND THERE IS NO MEANING AND OBJECTIVE TRUTH FOR SURE!!!

>>15093931
Read nigger
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eucharistic_theology

>>15093921
>zakir naik
Lmao you just lost whatever semblance of credibility you had left. Also “omnipresence” isn’t literally about physical location. It is that Allah literally encompasses all of creation hence he is everywhere and yet he is nowhere because he exists outside of creation as well. But it is not mutually exclusive

>>15091982
>>15093934

>>15093947
>NOO THIS WIKIPEDIA PAGE SHOWS USING MODERN SCIENCE THAT A PIECE OF BREAD CANNOT BE CHRISTS FLESH!!! ITS A METAPHOREINO NOT A FRICKING TRUTHERINO!!!

>>15093956
>NO NO NO IT IS NOT A SACRAMENTAL UNION WITH CHRIST IT IS PHYSICALLY HIS FLESH IT JUST LOOKS LIKE BREAD AND YOU CAN'T TELL BY ANY MEANS WE HAVE TO PERCEIVE IT!!

>>15093930
“Do you not see that Allah knows all that is in the heavens and all that is on the earth? There is no secret counsel of three, but He is their fourth, nor of five, but He is their sixth, nor of fewer than that, nor of more, but He is with them wherever they may be”

The “consensus” you’re talkimg about is amongst salafis who interpret the Quran strictly literally despite their being many (explicit) metaphors in it

>>15093956
>I am incapable of defending my faith other than through wojak memes

>>15093966
>NOOO YOU DO NOT GET IT!! SCIENTISTS HAVE DONE AN OBJECTIVE TEST AND MODERNITY WOULD DISAGREE WITH THIS!!! THEIR TEST SHOWS THAT IT WAS STIL BREAD MADE OF ATOMS AND ELECTRONS AND SCHRODINGERS CAT SHOWED THAT IT IS NOT CHRISTS BODY!!!

>>15093153
Man has forgotten his savaragery, and it will be exposed to him with no concern of the costs

>>15093980
>[this makes me right]

>>15093987
>the bread was symbolic

>>15094019
You are brain dead if you think 'sacramental union' and memorialism are the same position. Reading your autistic little spamfest, I find your lack of general theological literacy pathetic.

>>15094029
>NOOO SCHOLARS IN BIOLOGY TESTED A PIECE OF THAT BREAD THE PRIEST CHANTED OVER AND IT SHOWED UP AS NORMAL BREAD ON THE LAB RESULTS!!! IT WAS SYMBOLIC AND TAKEN ONLY AS A SYMBOL OF UNION!!

this thread was actually interesting to read especially the atheist muslim guy v the hardstance allah cant talk so how he tell people what he want guy

but then this whole thread went to shit with these wojak shitposts

if you want to go derail threads like this go back to /b/ or /v/ and get out

>>15092307
Based

Why is the bible so boring?
I've tried reading it multiple times, but I feel like I've read it all before, and mostly yeah I have as a child.

>>15091788
Faith is the individual exempting himself from evidence reason or critical thought. People understand the issue that objectivity cannot be objectively arrived at, so they say "whatever the fuck I wanted to take from it anyway is true." There is nothing to explain. Truth is not even a coherent concept and your value judgements and worldview have to be imposed upon an irrational universe.

>>15095336
thanks i thought about this topic last night while i was cleaning the cum off myself in the shower

>>15092004
Confirmation bias of the highest order, what is more likely, that people saw the future through the creator of the universe, or that some guy wrote a book describing past event and said it was written prior?

>>15092307
You should really look into bayesian probability

>>15092307
>treated it like a potentially reliable historical document
Why did you assume the gospels are an accurate historical account?

>So I accepted him as an honest man, but if I accepted him as honest then I'm compelled to accept the Old testament since he quoted from it and validated the ancient prophets.
Jesus being a honest man doesn't validate the Old Testament. He could have honestly believed in it and still have been wrong. He could have honestly believed in a falsehood.

>And by extension his apostles must be trustworthy since he gave them the great commission and duty to spread his message.
How does this make them trustworthy?

>>15091788
It's divine reasoning. Exactly what God said to Job - "I am right, because I am right. I will sacrifice your lifes, because of my right."
Then we get the reverence of his decision in Psalms, and then salvation in Jesus (from God).

>>15092799
Having a general foundation based on what? Your feelings of how "trustworthy" Jesus seems?

The step wise examples you give are either empirical or rational, what is religion?

>>15092307
No shit the NT and OT are consistent, the one who wrote the NT had access to the book that constituted the OT.
Even than, there is still many discrepancies between what the two of them teach

Because God said so good enough for me bro. And by bro I mean never my bro you fucking faggot

>>15092793
>that the Second Temple would be destroyed after the Messiah appeared
Where does it say that? From what I gather, if the Messiah had appeared, according to traditional jewish views, he'd have ruled the entirety of Earth and all the world would have converted to him, which is something Christians postpone to the second coming, a messianic event unacknowledged by traditional judaism.

>>15091788
If your axioms cannot prove it is false, it is true by default.

>>15091788
Take the leap of faith

This is a big problem for protestants, but not for Catholics. When taken as just a reliable human document, the bible shows that Christ not only rose from the dead, but that he established a church built on the apostles (Matt. 16:18-19, Eph. 2:20). The successors of the apostles, or the popes and bishops who inherited the apostles' spiritual authority, were then able to authoritatively declare the bible to be the word of god.

This is not a circular argument, in which an inspired bible is used to prove the church's authority and the church's authority is used to prove that the bible is inspired. Instead, as Karl Keating would say, it is a "spiral argument," in which the bible is assumed to be a merely human document that records the creation of the divinely instituted church. This church then had the authority to pronounce which human writings also had god as their author.

>>15091788
Its up to you to come to faith. God doesn't spoonfed.

>>15091788
what is wrong with circular logic? are you familiar with coherentism and dialectics?

>>15091788
I came back to Christ after I read Mark 15:34 and then psalm 22.

>>15096075
>I am right, because I am right.
damn jew god is dumb as fuck lol

>>15093212
this is literally one of the most retarded things I have ever seen. You should be institutionalized if this is the most your intellect can muster

>>15096000
>You should really look into bayesian probability

>>15100670
t. jew worshiper

>>15097615
Tell that story to eastern orthodox and coptics. All you guys try to sneak in false teaching using the vehicle of "muh tradition". Sorry doesn't work anymore. I'm sticking to the bible alone, faith alone, Christ alone through grace alone, not mediated by sacraments and priests and saints and popes who kiss Qurans and pray in mosques.

>>15101005
Good luck following the unclean spirit of anglo bugmanized modernity. I hope it turns out well for you.

>>15098588
This. Circular logic is the most trustworthy out of the three categories of logic.

>>15098588
>what is wrong with circular logic?
You are a faggot, therefore you are a faggot. Do you accept my argument?

>>15092642
No. God has one name, and its Jesus

>>15102725
God is the entire trinity

>>15092530
>>15092479

I have made maybe 3 posts here total and will say I am and was most definitely the lurker he is talking about. The trouble with a lurker is you never know if he's reading the posts, listening to you, or if he even exists at all.

>>15092558
Deïstic/Theïstic God is an Enlightenment-era construct that really only reflects the general distrust of intellectuals for 'holy scripture' and organized religion. Usually people who were mostly concerned with an ethical stance such as Pascal and Schopenhauer. I, for example, earnestly have faith in Aristotle's God (or the God of the platonists for that matter), that doesn't overstep the boundaries of what human reason can fathom. Their concept of God was plagiarized by the Christians and IS the Christian/Islamic God minus the Jewish mythology. Faith of the heart is involved, it is of course a pity that there is not as much of a strong aesthetic involved as in Islam/Christianity.

>>15092536
Yes?

>>15093871
You better forgive him or you'll burn with him, retard.

We can't understand the will of God. You just have to place your faith in him.