/lit/ - Literature

What's wrong with Christians?

>>16188136
>What's wrong with Christians?

>>16188136
That's how they cope while defending the mythical genocidal maniac

>>16188109
>Taking it out of context
This was a lamentation from the people who were being carried away from Jerusalem in bondage by the Babylonians. Them being taken away from Jerusalem and the Temple was seen by them as being separated from God. They would take joy in seeing the Babylonians destroyed since they were inflicting such great horrors on the people of Israel. It took a very long time for the Israelites to recover from this event. This also isn't Christian, it's Jewish

>>16188109
Their whole religion is just a Jewish revenge fantasy.

>>What's wrong with Christians?

>>16188109
Eye for an eye was the law in the Old Testament. Jesus put an end to it.

>>16188109
>christians decide to be more tolerant
>"lmao what a bunch of cucks"
>christians curse their enemies
>"wh-what's wrong with christians?!"
Which one is it, then?

Perfect example of how genocides and baby killing can be defended >>16188149

Worse than Nazis apologia

>>16188149
>anon was faster than me
have a big (you)

>>16188149
>This also isn't Christian, it's Jewish

Their whole religion is just a Jewish revenge fantasy.

>>16188169
And?

If God is good, why doesn't he follow my postmodernist egalitarian philosophy CHECKMATE CHRISTUCK GOTEM

>>16188215
You guys gotta try harder than that

>>16188217
Bible endorses destruction of you enemies, therefore destruction of your enemies is good, what else is not clear?

>>16188224
>babies and infants are enemies

Here we have lads, the < 40 IQ specimen

>>16188230
Eugenics is also good, apparently. I'm okay with that.

>>16188230
Clearly they are, since yahwe demanded death of everybody after kikes conquests.

>>16188201
He's making fun of your lies about how there is a difference. Everyone knows the Christian church considers itself the continuation of the old testament church. So no, according to Christians those were Christians.

>>16188285
You have no idea what you're talking about

>>16188149
That doesn't change the fact that they were for baby genocide because they were the inferior culture in every sense.
Isaiah 14
Exodus 1

>>16188314
Double based.

>>16188314
>Exodus 1
>The Pharaoh killing all of the Israelite children
You sneaky little Philistine

>This entire Psalm is placed in the mouths of Jewish captives, led naked and in chains towards Babylon after the sack of Jerusalem in 586 BC. Siege warfare is brutal and it generally ends badly. The soldiers are angry and frustrated at the long delay away from their families. By the time they enter the city they have often had unpleasant things dumped on them multiple times as they attempted to batter down the gates or scale the walls. They are angry, they are lustful and they are looking for revenge. The inhabitants of the city are usually starved, exhausted and powerless to defend themselves. It isn’t hard to imagine what went on. Wives were raped, children were trampled, families were ruined and lives were torn apart.
>It was hell on earth.
>That’s what happened to these people and those are the events that lie behind the writing of this Psalm. We have to at least acknowledge that we have no frame of reference for the depth of emotion that lies behind Psalm 137. We live in peaceful times. Our grandparents who fought in WW2 and who lived the reality of the Holocaust can likely relate to this verse much better than we can. They know what manner of brutality human beings are capable of but we, in our generation, try very hard to forget.
>But this happened.
>To real people.
>And those real people lifted their hearts in prayer to God.
>Psalm 137 is a prayer and it reflects the lowest notes on the human emotional scale. It is a real prayer flowing out of real experiences and for that reason alone it is worth wrestling with year by year.
https://ca.thegospelcoalition.org/columns/ad-fontes/dashing-little-ones-rock-verse-really-belong-scripture/

>>16188162
Both.

Learn the middle path.

>>16188329
Yeah, also slavery of Israelites. We know that one of those didn't happen. I wonder if the second, ever worse, happened...

>>16188285
>old testament church

>>16188285
Exactly

>>16188382
RADICAL MIDDLE PATHISM

>>16188396
I don't think you understand anything.

>>16188382
Thesis, antithesis, synthesis. Being a panentheist myself, I sport the doctrine that all orders of the old (flesh) Law were fulfilled by Christ our Lord, therefore, for every law in the Old Testament there's a corresponding fulfillment of this law in the New Testament.
Circumcision of the flesh -> circumcision of the heart through baptism
Bloody offering -> unspotted offering of bread and wine
Destruction of your enemies -> destruction of your sins
And so on.

>>16188531
>panentheist

Sir, this is /lit/, not cosplay convention

>>16188341
>and who lived the reality of the Holocaust
There was no holocaust. Mass starvation after supply lines were cut near the end isn't quite the same thing as industrialized extermination like claimed

>>16188149
Thanks for that "context". It makes me feel so much better when I smash infants against rocks. My conscience is now clear.

>>16188531
I feel like you've *heard* about Hegel being the culmination of philosophy (retardation of his dialectics, panentheism, interpretation of Christianity...), but you're still a complete brainlet.

>>16188215
>a key tenet of postmodernism is the refusal to smash babies on rocks
weeeew lad

>>16188394
>also slavery of Israelites. We know that one of those didn't happen
big if true, sauce?

>>16188731
>There was no holocaust. Mass starvation after supply lines were cut near the end isn't quite the same thing as industrialized extermination like claimed

Why are there so many different interpretations of supposed holy writ? I legitimately don't understand that. Is it Protestant heresy?

>>16188749
Lots of bad occurrences are within the stories of the Bible, this particular one isn't written as something you should do. You want it to be I understand, but only your reading comprehension is in question, not the morality of Christianity.

>>16188802
>isn't written as something you should do
Next time leave it out of your holy book, dumbass.

>>16188796
>to the tune of Sublimes song on 40oz to freedom
1 By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.

2 We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof.

3 For there they that carried us away captive required of us a song; and they that wasted us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion.

4 How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

5 If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning.

6 If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy.

7 Remember, O Lord, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof.

8 O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us.

9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

>powerful stuff
Its a prayer for vengeance and justice against a wicked people who destroyed Jerusalem and enslaved them and brought the slaves to modern day Bagdad. There isn't any debate about the context, praying for God to bring justice is a common theme in the Bible and why Justice is a virtue within Christianity.

>>16188828
tl;dr

>>16188165
>>16188749
Are you retarded? It’s an expression of anger and violence arising from a deep sorrow. Of course it’s not a moral desire, but it’s not meant to be. The author of the psalm is a human being, and he is expressing his human (sinful) anger. Not every single human action or speech in the Bible is approved of by God. You don’t even need to be trained in hermeneutics to get this; it’s literally just simple exegesis and interpretation. This is precisely why the Church used to withhold the scriptures from the laity; you have absolutely no discernment or ability to understand it.

>>16188815
this post shows your gross ignorance. Imagine a story with all the action scenes removed.

>>16188833
Yeah anyone taking out their anger on babies is a maniac.

>>16188833
>>16188834
Killing innocent little babies is wrong, you sick fuck. Stop trying to justify your degeneracy. It's nauseating.

>>16188833
>The author is expressing his human (sinful) anger
Righteous anger is not a sin. The author has not sinned by praying this prayer to God. Pic related.

>>16188850
Who said it wasn't wrong? Doesn't every story have an action scene that can be called wrong in someway when taken purposely out of context like youre doing?

>>16188862
It's not an action scene, dumbass.

>>16188856
>Righteous anger is not a sin.
Yes, it absolutely is.

>>16188872
Says the unbeliever. Shoo Shoo jewboi

>>16188868
It's like you didn't read the 9 verse chapter and have nothing meaningful to say. Now if your goal (I suppose) is to turn people away from Christianity, aren't you achieving the exact opposite by being transparently ignorant about an objective interpretation? Isn't there another more useful Jewish trick you could employ in your assault on God's word that would yield greater souls for Satan your master?

>>16188877
"You have heard how it was said to the people of the old time, You shall not kill. For whosoever kills will be liable to judgment. But I say to you, whosoever is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment. Whosoever says to his brother, Racha! will be liable to a council. But whosoever says, You fool! will be liable to hell fire." -- Matt 5:21-22

>>16188147
Spooked.

>>16188890
You straight-up want to kill kids, Shlomo. Your famed pilpul can't save you from the plain meaning of the words on the page.

>>16188905
Source: trust me bro

>>16188795
I agree with you, but I hate you for using a soijak and I do hope you die.

>>16188898
You left out a very important part of that verse. Pic related.

>>16188919
"Cause" is such a subjective word that it renders it meaningless.

>>16188919
There is no "without a cause" in the original Greek. That phrase was inserted by the editors of the KJV without any textual basis.

>>16188925
Shoo shoo jewboi

>>16188935
The traditional manuscript (Antioch) does include that. You are referring to the lost manuscript from Alexandria that disappeared for 1,500 years and reappeared in the 19th century when all these NIV based translations came out.

Would God allow His word to be lost for 1,500 years?

>>16188935
So you think that calling retards in this thread, who cannot understand what psalms are like >>16188833 said and do everything to spout their irrational, barbaric hatred on christianity, “fools” is what Jesus meant to be in danger of fire?

>>16188960
Utter nonsense.

>>16188937
Low IQ cope is pretty evident

>>16188963
You will be going to Hell, correct.

>>16188974
Shoo shoo ...you are so angry that people are having a discussion on finer points of Christianity instead of aghast in horror at your cherry picked op...that you are inserting yourself into a conversation that doesnt include you while pretending to be the other party. Kind of sad tbqh

>>16188989
You posted complete nonsense. The text of Mt 5:22 has nothing to do with the Antioch manuscript.

>>16189005
>ignore the King James Version goy
No thanks. I like my scripture inerrant infallible and inspired

>>16189020
You do know the New Testament was not written in English, right?

>>16188981
Matthew 7:1-6

>>16189034
They are not my rules. They are God's rules.

>>16188149
Ah yes, now that you've put it in context it is totally not barbaric and cruel to slaughter an enemy people because god told you so!

>there are unironic KJV-onlyists on /lit/

>>16188165
If it was up to me, people like you would be thrown from rooftops.

>>16189028
I guess you aren't the person I already explained the differences between the different manuscripts above. Since you clearly are out of your depth you should just stop replying.

>>16189056
Reprobate spotted

>>16188898
The Judeo-Xian-Islamic mode of argumentation is so tiresome and anti-philosophical.

>>16189147
Notice how the jew here cannot even bring himself to merely typing Christ out Fathers name out.

>>16189158
I am criticizing Christianity and Islam for being too Jewish and uncritically legalistic in their argumentation. You have to be an absolute retard to take what I say and get out of it 'He doesn't like Christianity: He is a Jew'.

>>16189212
You deny Christ, ipso facto you are a jew.

>>16188109
Nothing wrong with abortion.

Everything created before and after Jesus.

>>16189147
What the hell is an Xian?

>>16189102
You explained nothing. In fact, Codex Sinaiticus is the only early manuscript that includes "without cause" in Mt 5:22. Every other manuscript omits it. Literally the opposite of what you are arguing.

>>16189284
Its a term used by the kike because they won't say or type the name if Jesus Christ out of pure hatred for God. Did you know they don't even use the addition symbol because to them its too similar to the cross of Calvary?

>>16188109
In the spiritual sense, we dash the little ones of Babylon against the rock, when we mortify our passions, and stifle the first motions of them, by a speedy recourse to the rock which is Christ.

>>16189308
>muh cross
Everyone in antiquity knew that Christians worship what they deserve.

>>16189305
>Every other manuscript omits it.
You left out the fact that these manuscripts were all "lost" for 1,500 years. If we accept the Inspiration of the scripture we must also accept that every word has been and will be preserved through the ages.

>>16189393
>You left out the fact that these manuscripts were all "lost" for 1,500 years.
Wrong. Only the Codex Sinaiticus fits that description -- and it is the only manuscript that says "without cause". You are literally refuting your own point.

>>16189418
What's that written in?

Can the christians ITT explain me some of these loopholes I found in your belief?
>if I want my family to go to heaven I should just murder them all in cold blood as painfully as possible just to make sure. This act will ensure I go to hell, even though it was selfless sacrifice.
>if of all the religions humans have come up with throughout the years christianity turns out to be the single correct one, do people who have never even heard of it automatically go to hell? if not, do they get a free ticket to heaven even if their religion rewarded sin?

>>16189467
There's an entire section of Hell containing only Eskimos -- millenia upon millenia of benighted paleolithic Aleutians. That's just the way the cookie crumbles, kid.

>>16189467
Not a Christfag but neither of those are loopholes. For the first example, you can't presume the state of anyone's soul, and for the second one, their nonbelief is not held against them, and their culpability for many things is lessened, but they do not get a "free pass" (St. Paul talks about the "law written on the hearts of all men"). Christianity is still the safest, surest route to salvation and human completeness.

>>16189467
Ooh, nice and legal.

>>16189498
>you can't presume the state of anyone's soul
What the fuck is that supposed to mean? Let's say I wanna make sure my son gets in heaven before he grows up and does any sinful shit. According to christianity I should just murder him on the spot, at least that's how I see it.
>St. Paul talks about the "law written on the hearts of all men"
Let's say I, again, don't give a shit whatever happens to me after I die and just want to see other people easily get to heaven. I proceed to steal a bunch of newborns and build a small settlement in the woods, and as they grow up I teach them my own fake religion that rewards being a sinful asshole and punishes being good, but since they don't know and can't possibly know any better each of them lives a wonderful life of hedonism and selfishness. And after that they still go to heaven just because I never gave them a chance at accepting Christ and all that bs.

>>16189467
You're not half as clever as you think you are.

>>16189680
How about you answer the fucking question to show how smart you are?
I'm not even pulling the usual "can god make a rock he can't lift" shit. Playing entirely by your rules here and you're still unable to elaborate on anything.

Christians just cucks for authority. They get a hard on from being dominated by a superior, practically beg for obedience and deify a book that quite literally states you should give all your money to the cult leaders that control your whole life. Read Acts 5:1-11, it’s actually in there

>>16189696
I don't respect you enough to take you seriously. Pearls before swine and all that.

>>16189879
>I know hot to answer your question, but I won't since I don't respect you enough
Way to pathetically lose an argument, that's gotta be a record or something.

>>16189553
>Let's say I wanna make sure my son gets in heaven before he grows up and does any sinful shit.
durr retard, children aren't sinless in Christianity.
>And after that they still go to heaven just because I never gave them a chance at accepting Christ and all that bs.
Faggot. The Christian would say there is some kind of universal morality that all men have some inkling of, no matter their cucmstances. I don't believe that but that's part of their metaphysics. They also believe that God offers every single person the chance at redemption. That he speaks in the hearts of all men.

>>16189909
We're not having an argument, sweety. I only told you you're not half as clever as you think are. You trying to dunk on Christians in cringe.

>>16189929
>I only told you you're not half as clever as you think are
You told me that without having a way to prove it. Should've kept your mouth shut and saved your dignity.

>>16189953
When people call you a faggot do you demand proof?

Whats wrong with yeeting your enemies babies against rocks? Wasnt this a pagan thing too

What a bunch of whiny hippie liberals in this thread.

>>16189980
Why?

>>16189988
>Nooooooo, you can't just kill the children of the people who enslaved you and murdered your kind!!!!!

>>16189961
If by "faggot" you mean "whoever I dislike" then no, I don't give a shit
but you openly insulted my intelligence without pointing out a single flaw in my thinking, which objectively makes you full of shit

>>16189998
I think you literally suck cock.

>>16189998
Oh no he insulted my intelligence. I demand satisfaction, sir!

>>16190005
I don't care what you think unless you show prove it

>>16190027
Yeah it really seems like you don't care.

>>16189418
You still haven't validated your claim. Implying the manuscript used by everyone for 2,000 years is wrong requires substantiation.

>>16189495
Empty vessels
>>16189680
Don't cast your pearls before swine. This jew is bitter. Talk only to those who might be lurking.

>>16190085
what does it matter if he cares or not
this is just endless backpedaling coming from you

>>16190390
What am I backpedaling from?

>>16190418
answering the question he asked?
is that not obvious?

>>16190424
C'mon bro. It's obvious you're a reprobated sodomite.

>>16188764
What is abortion?

>>16190424
wait I meant deflecting

>>16190435
I'm not him
still deflecting
explain why?

>>16190424
You don't know what backpedaling means. I didn't take a position and walk back from it, I didn't answer questions because I don't argue with idiots.

>>16190451
>>16190444

>>16190453
It's still the wrong word because I'm not trying to distract or change the topic. You are an idiot.

>>16190459
You're doing it right now
you can deny that endlessly
just answer the question that started all of this

>>16188109

They delude themselves because they want to be comfortable

>>16190468
I would rather just insult you because I think you're a fag.

>>16188109
>it's all because of context, you see?
>except in this parts that should be taken literally, despite being an uninformed opinion written almost 2k years ago

>>16190478
that just makes me think that you just can't answer the question

>>16188109
it's a metaphor bro

>>16188405
ESOTERIC CENTRISM
MIDDLE-OUT ANARCHISM
RADICAL NORMIE ACCEPTANCE

>>16190489
I'm sure you think a lot of things that aren't so.

>>16188109
nothing. you're asking what's wrong with american christans, and the answer is that they're all from fucking quakers, that migrated to america because european christans were too "liberal".

In america it's all about "hell" and "punishment" and bla bla bla. In europe it's not about that.

>>16190474
Id argue that it's the atheist who is deluding themselves. The mere mention of Christ's name sends their whole world crashing down and erodes their rationality...sends them into a fit of rage ...over something they claim to disbelieve.

>>16190508
Same can be said to you
it's meaningless