/lit/ - Literature

>>16025727
okay, faggot. God is One. It is not an idea, it is fact, axiom seen by those who got, ascended high to the highest point, to the very core of self, of I, "I". all debates are debates of sick idiots.

>>16025765
Don't care.

>>16025848
of course. you are normie. 99.999%.

>>16026524
>t. namefag

>>16025727
Wat pagan system believes truth and creation come from one thing?

>>16026580
Let me present to you the Platonists, Aristoteleans, Stoics, Pythagoreans, Egyptians, Milesians and Eleatics

>>16026531
yet enlightened. you are not. I am Jesus, you are stupid weak pathetic sad faggot.

>>16025765
God doesn't exist

>>16027451
it is so easy to write such a comment. look mommy, I can shitpost sitting in your basement, I look like an adult, I'm cool!

>>16025727
I think that the issue is that gods worshipped by pagans were generally misunderstood by the masses of pagans, and they overlapped with their own source. Pagan intellectual elites knew that gods were ideas, influences, powers from the one god, but not the common worshipper. Christians criticized precisely this worship of the masses but misunderstood what the intellectual elites meant by gods. I think indeed that calling them gods even though lesser ones is retarded indeed.

>>16027213
>yet enlightened

>>16027541
samadhi is amazing. you know with all your essence that every book is a garbage, every word is a sin, an obstacle on the way to infinite happiness. people invented words, and words became their prison.

>>16027537
I don't think they were "misunderstood" by the masses just as sensible reality is not necessarily a misunderstanding but rather a more opaque knowledge of intelligible reality. A higher understanding of them is simply not for the masses concerned with everyday life. Just as in Buddhism true entrance into the nitty-gritty of the actual system is reserved for actual ascetic monks. If rebirth/reincarnation and slow climb of gnosis in what is the eternal outpouring from the Ineffable are true and a return is inevitable then turning oneself toward gods in reverent devotion is perfectly virtuous for the average citizen.

>>16025727
>So basically 2000 years of supposed victorious Christian dialectics against polytheism have been against a straw man?
All intellectual "victories" are against strawmen unless the supposed loser admits their defeat, yes.

>Are Christian arguments against polytheism basically that of a Christian philosopher arguing against a fictitious polytheist peon?
Yes. This is really notable in Augustine's works, wherein he frequently displays that he actually knows less about polytheistic religions than a literal polytheist peon would. Part of this is just his ethnic background, though. Semitic Christians (Augustine was a Berber, not a Semite) got really upset at things like the Greek Gods having different eye colors, and being able to wear different articles of clothing.

The problem is that Christian philosophers took the works of Plato (and Aristotle) and used them to craft Christian theology. Thus, both Pagans and Christians are arguing that their interpretation of their religion, both of which are influenced by Plato (and Aristotle), is the correct religion influenced by Plato (and Aristotle). In truth, almost every criticism levied by one works exactly against the other.

For example, Plato's One does nothing but exist, and Aristotle's Prime Movers (in Metaphysics he demonstrates that you can have infinite Prime Movers, but offers an argument based on empiricism for 47-52 Prime Movers, but later proposes an alternative astronomical model in De Caelo which offers an empirical argument for a single Prime Mover. This ties into Galileo, much later) do nothing but spin. The Pagans asked the Christians how they propose, then, that if Yahweh is The One / The Prime Mover, that he impregnates virgins. The Christians asked the Pagans how, if Zeus was The One / The Prime Mover (this is actually really complicated and we don't really know what everyone's opinion on this was, but many argued that Zeus/Jupiter held a position roughly similar to that of Yahweh in Judaism and Christianity, which at this time are incredibly similar but very quickly diverging) could do the same.

In the end, it really comes down to whose arguments who find convincing. That "whose" refers to individual philosophers and theologians, as there were many people on all sides who bitterly disagreed. Christians STILL can't agree on the basics concerning their religion, and if there were still people worshiping Zeus and Jupiter, they'd also be hotly contesting the basics of their religion as well.

>>16027537
>Pagan intellectual elites knew that gods were ideas, influences, powers from the one god,
This is not the case. Even most Platonic and Aristotelian thinkers at the time would not argue this. While the gods did come from some single source, to imply that they were just "abstract concepts" was silly. Ares was just as much "a thing" as you and I, and had just as much a mind as you and I, he just wasn't made out of the same stuff as you and I.

It isn't until you get to Gemistus Pletho (who died around 1450AD) that you start to see people arguing that only one god (who, to Pletho, was Zeus) is actually real and that all other gods are just angels bound to Zeus's will with no possibility of disagreement.

Again, Plato and Aristotle's "prime god" only does one very specific thing necessary to run the universe. They don't answer prays or impregnate virgins.

>>16027716
Good post. Even though I would have a minor disagreement with the last part of your post. The idea that pagans today would be hotly contesting the basics of their religion. I think non-Abrahamic religions have never really been particularly interested in hammering down the actual beliefs of people. Rather to be a pagan is to be so exoterically, and in many ways the rest is personal preference. Some interesting historical examples being that philosophers were often elected by the townspeople to serve as head priests in the temple, and these could be Pyrrhonists, Platonists, Atomists or whatever. Them being well-liked seemed to have been more important than any personal metaphysical beliefs. I think we can see that in Buddhism where the sects did not diverge out of contested violent debates but rather from splits in the sangha that resulted because the monks could no longer perform ritual and agree on precepts. Mahayana and Theravada had no problem sharing the same monastery in the beginning but the splits occurred when they no longer could live together in their exoteric expressions of Buddhism. A similar history can be seen in Hinduism, and European paganism from what I've gathered.
>Semitic Christians (Augustine was a Berber, not a Semite) got really upset at things like the Greek Gods having different eye colors, and being able to wear different articles of clothing.
lel why?

>>16026593
yah, but most of those are not even polytheist explicitly. you could at beast say the people who followed rhese paths lived in a traditionaly polytheistic society. what does stoicism have to do with the plurality or singularity of divinity?

>>16026593
Socrates started literally by hating on the pagan gods. He and Plato and Aristotle build the groundwork for Christianity, but they themselfs were philosophers, not the general populace who were pagan

>>16027918
You seem like the kind of guy that think Socrates was killed for impiety.

>>16025727
In a sense yes, but Christians turned this on its head and argued that the Christian truth had already been partially apprehended by the philosophers of the Greeks through reason. They contrasted this with the popular religion of worshipping idols and folk myths about Zeus turning into animals etc. which were ridiculed as the preserve of the unintelligent.

The most serious and sustained disagreement between pagan Greek philosophy and Christian thinkers was the possibility of creation ex nihilo. Aristotle and others believed the universe was eternal contrary to the Biblical doctrine that there had been a creation as in Genesis.

>>16027735
Dude, Olympiodorus (a prominent platonist) back in ~500AD emphasized that daimons for example were just powers of our own consciousness. This was regarded by most if not all platonists. The gods were not simply ''abstract ideas'' but influences like how the egyptian priests, theologians understood the neters.

>They don't answer prays or impregnate virgins.
You should read more. Ever read Timaeus or any platonic dialogue? Ever read about piety in the dialogues? Iamblichus writings extensively on prayer? Anedoctes of Proclus being pious toward the gods?

>>16027650
You are right. It is certainly virtuous to worship and regard the gods the way they did and do. But as you said it is not the higher, or how some platonists would put it, it is superficial.

>>16026593
You can be both monoteistic and pagan. This thread is embarrassing.

>>16028128
>You can be both monoteistic and pagan.
Good input. Powerful statement. Brave stance. Whatever brainghost of yours you're arguing against must surely be running away in fear.

>>16027716
>Semitic Christians (Augustine was a Berber, not a Semite) got really upset at things like the Greek Gods having different eye colors, and being able to wear different articles of clothing.
The absolute state of this board. Not even worth ridiculing.

>Christian philosophers took the works of Plato (and Aristotle) and used them to craft Christian theology...
Partially true. Christian theology was heavily influenced also by jewish mystic sects like Merkabah mysticism, like Paul's compositions. In any way, would you say the middle and late platonists took the works of aristotle to craft a more polished version of that platonism of Plato, who in turn took literally everything from egyptians, except in the rational manner of exposition? Oh...

Also, read Plato's Timaeus.

>>16025727
what the fuck are you on about? whats with this reductionist bull? you talk about a single specific debate point, interpretate it in a specific way, then you posit that rhe next two mellenia has just been a strawman? absolute shit thread on an actually interesting topic like monarchia.

>>16025727
>Are Christian arguments against polytheism basically that of a Christian philosopher arguing against a fictitious polytheist peon?
Basically this, most educated Greek pagans would have believed in a first cause, some would make this an impersonal tetrad, others like Plotinus the One.

Also the Christians pretended the Greeks thought the Gods where statues. Which they did not.

>>16028186
>The absolute state of this board. Not even worth ridiculing.
I am sure genetics and races arent real, please, read a book about the subject.

>>16027918
>hating
lmao what the fuck, the guy just wants people to start seeing theology in a more rational perspective than in that brutish superstitious way of the greeks, in many other dialogues socrates mentions and reveres the gods

>but they were philosophers
yeah this word philosophy certainly was not what you think it means today, in any way, egyptians, indians, chaldeans theologians thought the same as the ''philosophers''

>>16027594
Different anon here.
>every book is a garbage, every word is a sin, an obstacle on the way to infinite happiness.
What do you mean by this? How are books garbage? Do you include stuff like cookbooks and instruction manuals, or are we only talking about literature? I'm lost here, please clarify. Unless you're just baiting, in which case enjoy your (You).

>>16028186
>>16028100
Religions of Rome, Vol I and II. Roman Religion, by Dumezil. These are my sources. Nobody cares about your personal schizo theories. If you have access to some sort of text that contradicts all historical evidence, then publish it. Until then, fuck off and go read a book.

>>16028390
Are you seriously implying that actual academics who have read ancient texts in their original languages and spent their lives studying these topics are more reliable than some random sperg on the internet claiming to have deciphered Pythagoreanism from ancient egyptian texts, despite never having actually read anything by Plato, or an Egyptian?

>>16028447
Yes.

Dumezil in particular is fun, because he read essentially everything there is in Latin on the Roman ethnic religion. This isn't hyperbole, the man was just incredibly erudite and incredibly autistic. I could cite more books if you'd like. Roman Honor is pretty interesting. The House of Hades is also a good one, and a good demonstration of the fact that no, the Greeks did not view their gods as "personified forces" or whatever.

>>16028363
I am not baiting. This is samadhi, enlightenment, nirvana. Look at this boy, everyone of us was born with shining eyes. The fact that he does not know any language yet contributes a lot to his state of happiness. Words are "apples" which Eva learned with Adam. Words replaced actual knowledge. Words became toxic, that is why people who live in the same reality lose shit endlessly arguing about "god", "love", but way to happiness, to God, to inner self is to stop proving that you are right, it is absolutely pointless in eternity. Life of a child, Buddha, Jesus is action, you get dopamine from muscle activity, by expressing yourself, consuming expressions of others is little help unless you learn from them.

>>16028470
I get it, babies are happy because their minds aren't tainted with worldly knowledge. They also get easily upset or scared by silly shit for that same reason, though. I don't know man, I'm not one to try to shit on anyone's happiness, if you're content with your beliefs then I'm glad for you. But I feel as though the truth is a little more complicated and abstract than you're making it out to be. Happiness isn't everything. There needs to be some suffering to give it weight and context. it's nice to have a piece of cake sometimes, but if you eat it for every meal, you're eventually going wish you could have a salad. Anyways more power to you, enjoy your communion with the godhead.

>>16028178
None said Christianity invented monotheism. What has been said it's that paganism anticipated Christianity because all pagan philosophy end up in monotheism. You're an ignorant and this thread is embarrassing.

>>16028390
Ok, here are mine:
Plato, Complete Works.
Aristotle, Complete Works.
Plotinus, Complete Works.
Proclus, Complete Works.
Iamblichus, Complete Works.
Priscianus, Complete Works.
Nicomachus of Gerasa, Complete Works.
Marinus of Neapolis, Complete Works.
Plutarch, Complete Works.
Olympiodorus, Complete Works.
Simplicius, Complete Works.
Damascius, Complete Works.
Hierocles of Alexandria, Complete Works.
Isaac Israeli, Complete Works.
Numenius of Apamea, Complete Works.
Damascius, Complete Works.
Elias and David, Intro to philosophy.
Macrobius, Complete Works.
John Philoponus, Complete Works.
Pseudo-Aristotle, Liber de Causis.
Amelius, Complete Works.

>go read a book

>>16028465
>yes

As I said before, not even worth ridiculing.

>>16028739
>>16028390
>>16028465
Oh forgot secondary literature and sacred texts of mediterranean and near eastern religions. Do you want me to post them too so you can educate yourself?

>>16028739
>>16028756
This was already addressed here>>16028390.

>>16028691
Pagan philosophy did not anticipate Christianity. It was the underlying philosophy of their polytheism and basic metaphysical concerns on first principles.

Pretending their philosophy leads to Christianity is just your modern post-pagan presuppositions framing everything through that lense as you look backwards in time. If Islam had actually managed to convert India then they'd be saying the exact same things about Hindu philosophy. Shankara? Crypto-Muslim. Bhagavad-Gita? Author despising polytheism and elevating monotheistic bhakti of the much anticipated one true Allah.

>>16028739
>isaac israeli
>a 9th century AD rabbi
>as a source about what greek polytheists believed
lmfao you should have read this list before you copied it dude

>>16028791
you mentioned that all i said was my personal theories and asked texts that contradicts ''historical evidence'' and i gave them to you, peabrain.

>>16028827
>Islam
It's worth noting that Muslims also say that Aristotle and Plato were actually just anticipating Islam, and indeed both (alongside Alexander the Great) were in truth pious Muslims who studied Shariah, were fluent in Classical Arabic, and prayed five times a day towards Mecca.

So, not only did Christianity base its theology off of the existing Platonic and Aristotelian structures already present in the Classical world, but so did Islam. In fact, Judaism did as well.

>>16028832
he was a jewish platonist you absolute retard

>>16028661
suffering is only tool to learn why you suffer and fix it. why adults are unhappy? because they were restricted by parents. for them to be happy is to offend their parents. fetish of suffering is what makes people narcissists, they pose as victims to reject responsibility and demand special treatment, reparations. we are good because we suffer. why do you think jesus and castaneda said to leave all your close ones? not to engage in this larping. it is bad for your health, body, spirit.

>>16028837
This was already addressed here >>16028390. Go read a book, your personal feelings on this matter are irrelevant.

>>16028100
>You should read more. Ever read Timaeus or any platonic dialogue?
Not him but I'm pretty sure he was talking about how the first principle does not bang virgins or listens to prayers, which is what the Christians believe in. Not that the gods does not do these things.

>>16028845
>what did the ancient greeks believe?
>they believed X
>no, they believed Y, my source is some jewish guy from tunisia born three centuries after paganism was made illegal also i havent read anything he wrote just trust me bro
you got backed into a corner, you copied a list of books off the internet, and you fucked up. better luck next time.

>>16028739
Could you post the authors who wrote these books? I can't find anything titled "Isaac Israeli, Complete Works" or "Hierocles of Alexandria, Complete Works".

>>16028851
lmao, good one

>>16028852
this would require a lot to be unfolded, but we only know the Father through the Son (which is His image), everything through the Logos, just like everything was created by the Demiurge in Timaeus, the Divine Intellect of other platonists, which referred back to the One, created contemplating the One God.

>>16028868
>what did the ancient greeks believe?
>retard goes to say they believe what Dumézil wrote about.
>proceed to list more than 15 platonists proving exactly what I say since all I say is literally based on them
>noooooooooooo you cant cite direct sources you have to be on the same level as me and cite a french philologist from the 20th century who wrote exclusively on Indo-European society!!!!!!!

>>16028877
Isaac israeli: https://www.amazon.com.br/Isaac-Israeli-Neoplatonic-Philosopher-Century/dp/0226016137

Hierocles: https://www.amazon.com.br/Commentary-Hierocles-Golden-Verses-Pythagoras/dp/1497959977

>>16028868
>what? among your 20 direct sources of pagan theology you cited a jewish heavily influenced by pagan theology???????? you got backed into a corner! hahahaha gotcha!

>>16028844
>pious Muslims who studied Shariah, were fluent in Classical Arabic, and prayed five times a day towards Mecca.

Look up the concept of "Hanif"

>>16028891
Sorry not gonna argue with you now that I realized you're a Christian. Everything devolves into theological apologetics as you necessarily have to defend and justify your faith, gain more followers, and you have no qualms about sliding into Christian heresy to win an argument as the ends justify the means.
>inb4 ad hominem
Whatever.

But the demiurge potentially listening to prayers and impregnating virgins is not the same as the monarchia of Christianity ;which historically Christians have tried to equate in transcendence with that of the Ineffable, doing it. Pagan philosophy would never allow for such things to their first principle.

>>16029049
>Pagan philosophy
why do people keep trying to conflate pagan religion with classical philosophy when they are not the same thing? of course, at some extent one influenced the other and vis versa but you say this like the two were in some kind of harmony when irs rather evident that they deliniated religion and phil in a lot of the period. and a decent amount of the qhil questioned the very existance of the gods. this seems like warping the very fundements.

>>16028914
>>16028940
well, dumezil read things written by the ancient greeks and romans, and you copied a list of books you havent read off of the internet, so im gonna have to trust him over you.

>>16029017
Yes, I am aware, that is exactly what I just described. My awareness of this concept is why I was capable of describing it in my previous post. Alexander being a Muslim is literally in the Quran.
>b-but...
Okay fine: Islamic theologians cite passages in the Quran about Alexander being a Muslim as evidence of him being a Muslim.

>>16029070
Because the idea that Plato was a Muslim over 1,000 years before Muhammad was born is flat out ludicrous. It's patently obvious that Islam and Christianity took the existing philosophical structures of their day and adapted them to their own ends. The ancients themselves made no distinction, and as even a cursory reading will tell you their philosophy was deeply interwoven with their religion. "Philosophy" and "Religion" being separate is an inherently Christian concept (with Philosophy simply being "Religious Pagans trying to understand the world"), and because Christianity has a definitive starting point, and because the Ancients themselves make no distinction between the two, we can safely say that before 33AD, no one made a distinction between "philosophy" and "religion" in a way at all similar to what we do today.

Plato himself took part in pagan rituals and practices, anon. Starting with the Greeks means you have to actually read the Greeks.

>>16029049
>Not gonna argue with you
and were you arguing before? just see the past posts here, that is laughable.

>everything devolves into apologetics
and what did I say about christianity when I was correcting the distorted, to say the least, point of view you have about ancient pagan theology? Just started mentioning Christianity when the other anon questioned me about it.

>monarchia of Christianity
do you even knows what this means? The Father is the Monarch, all things are through the Son, the Son is the Father's Wisdom, Image, Logos.

>christians have tried to equate the monarchia of the father in transcendence with that of the ineffable.
All things concerning the Godhead and the Persons and the relations between the Persons and the Begetting of the Father, and the Procession which brought the Spirit are essentially apophatic. We know they are distinct but not their nature, in the same way the Ousia is inscrutable. This has been present since the Old Testament, specially Exodus. Read some Gregory of Nyssa, Dionysius.

>Pagan philosophy would never allow such things to their first principle
allow what? I know you are utterly ignorant about pagan theology, just see what the late platonists wrote about the One.

>>16029070
Pagan religiosity and pagan philosophy are not the same thing, I agree. But they work in tandem. There is a reason why the greatest philosophy in history always appeared in polytheistic societies, be it Greece, India or Egypt. While the Jews produced nothing philosophically, and Christianity and Islam achieved nothing but the continual attempts of getting their revealed religions to fit and make sense in pagan philosophy and terminology.

>>16029122
>Plato himself took part in pagan rituals and practices, anon
sauce?

>>16029070
Because ''classical philosophy'' was born out of pagan religion. For fuck's sake just read a book on platonism. Platonism (pythagoreanism, orphism) is the only faithful rational pursuit of philosophy and pagan religion. The rest: Atomism, Sophism, Stoicism, Pyrrhonism, Epicureanism, are all aberrations, the platonists themselves wrote extensively on the definitions of philosophy, where did it derive from and how it is ultimately an endeavour to sketch a rational support for religion itself.

>>16029122
>"Philosophy" and "Religion" being separate is an inherently Christian concept
What you base this upon? This has absolutely no sense. The rationalism that impregnated philosophy started with pagans themselves, just read above, but specially with Zeno, the Eleatic.

>the Ancients themselves make no distinction between the two
Just read plato holy shit. This was already a thing among the pagans, platonists are all the time dividing themselves from the masses with their, as they say, ''phantastical'' superstitions. It is undeniable rationalism creeped into platonic theology, that is why Iamblichus strived his whole life to appropriate the theurgy from other pagan religions and establish it in platonism.

>Starting with the Greeks means you have to actually read the Greeks.
and you have read not even Plato.

>>16029212
The most open example is his participation in the Isthmian Games, which were an explicit and open religious ritual to Poseidon equivalent to (but not as popular as) the Olympics. The Isthmian Games, like all of the Greek Games and Greek athleticism as a whole, were also part of a large religious system. This is why Theodosius banned them, and athleticism as a whole, because of their inherent pagan nature.

Source: The End of Greek Athletics in Late Antiquity.

>>16029244
>What you base this upon?
Thomas Aquinas, for starters, who openly said he wasn't a philosopher because philosophy was inherently Pagan.

>>16029082
>cite literally the writings of 20 ancient greeks and romans supporting what i say
>yeah but akchually dumezil read ancient greeks and romans!!
you are an irredeemable retard

>>16029259
>inherently Christian concept
I ask again: what you base this upon?
Aquinas came a thousand years later pagans themselves who were the ones who started to divide philosophy from religion, like I wrote in THE VERY SAME POST.
Can you at least read before posting?

>>16029160
>There is a reason why the greatest philosophy in history always appeared in polytheistic societies, be it Greece, India or Egypt
i dont see the reason. i would say a more probable reason was because most of the first civilizations were polytheist and its more a product of those places developing first rather than their religious structure per say. it seems very odd to specifically say the multiplicity of their divinity made them good philosophers. especially in terms of the greeks when most of their philosophical developments happened in a relitively limited set of time.

i think the deliniation if pagan vs non pagan is arbitrary when it comes to phil development.

>>16029212
lel half the fucking(exaggeration) dialogues takes part around pagan festivals and sacrifices. Should be remembered that the games were just as much of a religious event as anything else. Socrates's last dying wish was for a sacrifice to be made to Asclepius on his behalf.

>>16029263
i didnt cite dumezil, some other guy did. he said that dumezil read the greeks, and he read dumezil. you havent read the greeks, nor have you read dumezil, and are instead citing a tunisian jew born in the 800s (whose works you have not read) as evidence of what the ancient greeks believed around 400bc.

or are saying that you did in fact read "itab al-Baul" aka "Sefer ha-Shetan" aka "on urine", as you claim?

>>16029275
>I ask again: what you base this upon?
I answered you, Thomas Aquinas, some of whose works I have read.

>Aquinas came a thousand years later
And Isaac Israeli came 1,000 years after Plato yet you cited him as an example of what the Greeks in 400BC thought, what's your point? I claimed that the distinction between philosophy and religion is an inherently Christian one. My source is Aquinas. He says exactly what I claimed he said.

>>16029160
wait wait wait wait...
there is an abysmal qualitative difference between the theology of the egyptians and indians and the philosophy of the greeks, you know it right? You also know that christian theology is not a monolithic thing, you have christian apophatic theology and scriptural exegesis, which are much closer to that of the egyptians, indians, chaldeans, etc. and you have cataphatic theology, which was indeed rationalistic and heavily influenced by pagan philosophy.

>>16029319
He was on here last night claiming that he had secret texts from the Egyptians unifying Christianity, Hinduism, Egyptian polytheism, Platonism, and Greek polytheism, so, no, he doesn't actually know that.

>>16029327
And Pythagoreanism, he was claiming these secret texts also had detailed doctrinal explanations of what Pythagoras thought. Forgive my forgetfulness.

>>16029316
>Aquinas
you really are not able to read or to understand what you read, how can one talk with someone like this?
you said inherently and i said that it is false, aquinas is literally repeating what the pagans themselves said.

>Isaac Israeli came years after plato and you cited him
oh yeah a platonist came years after plato just like literally every platonist... wow.... imagine if i hadnt cited another 19 platonists of THE SAME time as isaac israeli.

>distinction between philosophy and religion from Christianity
just read pic related

>>16029319
Pagans have axiomatic rituals and festivals. Abrahamism have axiomatic revealed doctrines. The former does not conflict with philosophy while the latter makes it so that even the project of philosophy itself is impossible and leaves only forms of theology open for inquiry. Like the other anon said, Aquinas was right.

And yes I am aware that different polytheist societies produced different philosophies.

>>16029327
>>16029343
That was most definitely not me but go off

>>16029327
>>16029343
what are you talking about? that was me you utter retard and i was not saying there exists egyptian texts unifying hinduism, greek polytheism, christianity. are you retarded for real?

>>16029291
samefagging again...
I CITED 20 FRICKING PLATONISTS YOU UTTER RETARD THIS BOARD IS A CANCER WITH PEOPLE LIKE YOU

>>16029410
>>16029406
Could you please get a trip so that nobody has to deal with you anymore? This is like the fourth thread you've drowned in your weird schizobabble.

>>16029392
you don't seem aware of many things... platonism and aristotelianism was merged in christianity how, if they conflict?
>pagans have axiomatic rituals and festivals
there is no such thing as axiomatic rituals and festivals, lmao what does it even mean? rituals and festivals are based on a mythopoesis, which guess what, considered to be revealed by most if not ALL traditions.

now the problem of philosophy is its utter rationalistic approach to that which is essentially non-rational, super-rational. platonism preserves a lot of this religious consciousness in the One, but still as I posted Olympiodorus' point of view on religion, the rationalistic character precludes them to be a single thing like it is in christianity and was in egyptian theology.

>>16029418
>>16029386
so you didn't read "on urine", by the 9th century tunisian jew who is apparently an expert on what the greeks thought in 400bc?

>>16029460
you are the cancer of this board just like that other anon who simply ignores everything i say to repeat the same nonsensical thing about a platonist being a jew! look at the level of the people in this board.
now, yesterday, you said there were no pythagorean writings in circulation, and I posted more than 10 pythagoreans whose works survived to this day.
you people are not even human, seriously.

>>16029386
>just read this contextless blob of text that, upon actually reading, doesn't actually have anything to do with the topic at hand
Okay, done. It doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand, nor does it explain how the works of a Jewish man physician born in the 800s in Tunisia is supposed to mean anything when discussing what the Greeks of 500-400BC thought.

Are you ESL, by chance?

>>16029472
lol if a platonist from the 9th century has no idea about what the greeks thought in 400bc, certainly a french bugman from the 20th century has. brave anon, brave!

>>16029484
That was my first post in the thread, and I really don't care, I just want to stop seeing your worthless gibberish fill up every thread.

>>16029496
well, as anon said, dumezil actually read the greeks, and you havent read the greeks, nor have you read anyone who has read the greeks... so yeah im gonna trust the dude who read the dude who read the greeks over you.

>>16029493
yes platonists didn't exist after plato!
the level of the people in this shithole to avoid admitting they have mistaken conceptions of things.
thank you now i can leave for ever

>>16029522
I never said Platonists didn't exist after Plato, I asked you why a 9th century Tunisian Jew is at all important in a discussion of 5th century BC Greek religious thought. Why would I, or anyone, care about the medical works and philosophical musings of someone in a totally different period than what the discussion is about?

>>16029463
>axiomatic rituals and festivals
Meaning they're unquestionable, unchangeable, and essential. Philosophy remains free though. This not being the case in Christianity.
>pagan: whacky theories on the gods + sacrifice = pagan
>christian: whacky theories on God + taking the sacraments = heretic. burn in hell or if found out earlier burn in life

>>16029566
>This not being the case in Christianity.
i guess, but that is the delineation line in the christian tradition where one part is a matter of faith and the other a mater or reason.

>>16029566
>unquestionable, unchangeable, and essential
yes exactly like the myths revealed upon which all of these are based secondarily. congratulations in saying nothing at all!

such a barbaric view of christianity, huh? what should i expect... read any christian theology, i have nothing to say anymore.

>>16027537
Low IQ degenerate modern reductionism.

Romans considered Christians to be superstitious atheists in that they didn't understand the essence of religion practically or philosophically.

Christian theology is largely pagan Greek/Roman of a much later date. The thing you're talking about is obviously historical revisionism, which Christian authorities are so fond of that they purged mention of other gods in the Bible and as you say, invent strawmen for political purposes.

>>16027910
>plurality or singularity of divinity
this is a fake question to begin with

>>16027537
>I think indeed that calling them gods even though lesser ones is retarded indeed.
the word god literally comes from the verb for libation/offering. different etymology in romance languages where it comes from sky/heaven. christian god was never called god until the need to insert it into these pantheons and attempt generalise the concept into one personification.

>>16027537
Kinda like the way the bulk of christians misunderstand their god

>>16029941
read pic related >>16029386
is this modern for you?

>>16029995
another illiterate ignorant... read >>16029386

>>16030140
>christian god was never called god until the need to insert it into these pantheons and attempt generalise the concept into one personification.
What are you talking about