/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14467647]

>mfw I realize that all non-Catholics have either misunderstood Aquinas or have simply not read him
>mfw Aquinas retroactively refuted Parmenides, Epicurus, Voltaire, Stirner, Nietzsche, Whitehead and Guénon

[Anonymous No.14467672]

why do people from every culture in every historical period agree on the nature of the revelation achieved through meditative self contemplation?

why does catholicism, on the other hand, only exist under one set of cultural and historical factors?

[<negarestan1poopoo> !gDrA1n2Fhc No.14467702]

>>14467647
Every time aquinas is brought up its masturbation till kantians show up, and thomists an hero.

[Anonymous No.14467716]

>>14467702
All fucking tripfags must fucking hang.

[Anonymous No.14467727]

>>14467672
the two biggest religions in the world (and the smaller religion they are derived from) are both based on historically situated revelation not the detached contemplation of sages

[Anonymous No.14467739]

>>14467647
Ἀναγίγνωσκε τὸν Παλαμά, ἀγράμματε Λατῖνε.

[Anonymous No.14467743]

>>14467727
the biggest religion in the world is modernity (which includes many sects of Islam and Christianity). i hope you will be converting soon!

[Anonymous No.14467749]

>>14467647
Did he retroactively refute Bart Ehrman?

[Anonymous No.14467751]

>>14467727
why would god only give the means to revelation to certain groups of humans

[Anonymous No.14467759]

>mfw I realize that all Papists have either misunderstood Calvin or have simply not read him

[Anonymous No.14467781]

>>14467751
idk man, im just refuting the exaggerated claim of the poster who says that “every people from every period” believed in some sort of wisdom tradition. religions of revelation have been prominent from a long time already, so it’s a dumb thing to claim

[Anonymous No.14467870]

>>14467647
most catholics have never read him either. he explicitly states that heretics should be killed, and yet we have fucking ecumenical potlucks and shit

[Anonymous No.14467883]

Since Aquinas is getting brought up I want to mention I find his theory on werewolves interesting. He says demons can transmute flesh consistent with the Bible describing the staffs turning into snakes in Egypt. However, he says the soul can only be transmuted by God. Therefore, a werewolf would have full human agency and mind. Does /lit/ agree with this?

[Anonymous No.14467887]

>>14467883
the known connection between brain and mind kind of poses a problem for that. if a werewolf, physiologically, has a wolf brain than he would also have a wolf mind

[Anonymous No.14467891]

>>14467883
totes. werewolves are just a symbol for horny men, but I believe Aquinas bullshit any day of the week, since it's a funnier universe that way.

[Anonymous No.14467970]

>>14467887
this.

[Anonymous No.14467978]

What are the details of the religious experience he had described here?

[Anonymous No.14467984]

Can someone explain how he refuted Nietzsche please? I haven't read Aquinas, but I've read Nietzsche and I want to get into Aquinas.

[Anonymous No.14467990]

>>14467891
Based.

[Anonymous No.14468015]

>>14467978
I guess Saint Peter's successor came right down his throne and told him to shut his big fat pie hole

[Anonymous No.14468029]

>>14467647
How can he have retroactively refuted thinkers who came before him? That's just regular refutation

[Anonymous No.14468044]

>ayololo
>wololo

[Anonymous No.14468055]

>>14468029
“retroactive refutation” is a new-ish meme phrase. it’s not mean literally

[Anonymous No.14468094]

>>14467647
>how to stump a catholic
we have our own way of dealing with your type around here

[Anonymous No.14468217]

>>14467751
because revelation is not salvation, but merely one of many tests

[Anonymous No.14468223]

>>14467647
>Posting his airbrushed pic
Dude was a fat fuck, his memory needs to own that fact

[Anonymous No.14468231]

Being and Pure Act is not the First Principle.

[Anonymous No.14468245]

>>14467716
(You)’re so silly.

[Anonymous No.14468256]

>>14467751
He thinks its funny, aliens abduct and rape only drunks and schizos because they are closer to god and underestand his humor.

[Anonymous No.14468407]

>>14467716
Amen.

[Anonymous No.14468553]

>>14468223
fat by medieval standard tho

[Anonymous No.14468564]

>>14468256
fuck thats hilarious

[Anonymous No.14468571]

>>14467672
>every culture
Not Greece, Rome, Western culture, the native Americans etc
I guess the Asian cultures do, but they influenced each other heavily and there goes the theory

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.14468585]

>>14467647
>retroactively refuted
>Chicken shit heretic offers no examples
Typical

[Anonymous No.14468628]

>>14468044
Ayoyoyo

[Anonymous No.14468635]

>>14467647
why is the pope infalliable?

[Anonymous No.14468653]

>>14468635
why not?

[Anonymous No.14468661]

The wrestlerification of philosophy on this board is depressing.
"AQUINAS SLAMS HUME WITH SCHOLASTIC METAPHYSICS"
"STIRNER EVAPORATES MORALITY WITH HIS ANTI-SPOOK BEAM"

[Anonymous No.14468699]

>>14468661
>Anon Cena Smash!
ok now this is epic

[Anonymous No.14468728]

>>14468699
It's the ultimate warrior zoomer.

[Anonymous No.14468741]

>>14468661
Ayoyoyo

[Anonymous No.14468752]

>>14468728
iis wrestling a zoomer or a boomer thing?

[Anonymous No.14468861]

>>14468653
because he clearly isn't infalliable. to be falliable is human

[Anonymous No.14468880]

>>14468861
he's only infallible like 0.00001% of the time

[Anonymous No.14468881]

>>14468635
>>14468861
Why do Protestants criticize papal infallibility when they haven't even read the Wikipedia page on it? It would take 2 minutes for you to understand the limits of papal infallibility but you're too stubborn and/or lazy.

[Anonymous No.14468903]

>>14467883
So your telling me all those babies I ate where the result of my own sick, perverted mind and not some sort of demonic possession?

Whew, that's a relief.

[Anonymous No.14468932]

>>14467647
>mfw Aquinas retroactively refuted Parmenides, Epicurus
Do you want me to tell you how I know that you're a faggot?

[Anonymous No.14469385]

If I wanted to stump Catholics, I wouldn't ask retarded questions like "if God is kind, why does he allow murder?!?!?!1" because this could be asked to any religion.

I would ask them to disprove Martin Luther: why does the Pope exist when every person can be close to God through prayer and church service?
Where - in the bible - does it say that a Pope should exist or is necessary and why in particular is the Vatican State in Italy the religious center of Catholics? It seems to me that my local church in my small 8,000 population town is good enough to get closer to God. Jesus was a Jew and lived in Israel. Shouldn't the Pope live in Israel?

[Anonymous No.14469532]

>>14467984
Nietzsche was wrong because Christianity is right.

[Anonymous No.14469542]

>>14469385
What an awful post

[Anonymous No.14469559]

>>14468881
Protestants don't criticize "papal infallibility", they just reject the pope outright. Doesn't matter if what he says is right or wrong. The pope can't speak to God any more than me or you. There is no difference between the Pope and you.

[Anonymous No.14470046]

>>14467647
is the catholic/orthodox/protestant(calvinist) gospel different from the baptist gospel? I'll link a baptist gospel below and someone tell me if there's any difference between yours.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8xZTVKx0Dc

[Anonymous No.14470058]

You can do anything with mental gymnastics if you are allowed to pick and choose what sources are real or not. Aquinas is the quintessential "bad faith" philosopher

[Anonymous No.14470398]

>>14467647

It's exactly the other way round. When I started reading the Summa, I was delighted. I thought, "THIS is the great master, the great doctor of the Church? THIS is the smart guy Jesus boy that I'm supposed to be so afraid of?"

[Anonymous No.14470490]

>>14468635
Because sometimes God wants to tell His people stuff. The same reason the Bible is.

[Anonymous No.14470506]

>>14467751
he chose the most wretched people on earth as a test to the rest of humanity. the way humans see jews, god sees humans.

[Anonymous No.14470510]

>>14469559
Papal infallibility isn't about the Pope "speaking to God". It works the same way that Biblical infallibility does. In very specific circumstances, the Pope will authoritatively define a dogma of the Church and Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit doesn't let him make any mistakes.

[Anonymous No.14470839]

>>14467672
Because, from our creed: “...he suffered under Pontius Pilate, was Crucified, died and was buried...”

Stare at the crucifix. Meditate on the whole passion, from Gethsemene to Golgatha to the tomb. It always unsettles people from other religions, esp the great “sages” (thank God we don’t have those in our faith, Church Fathers could wreck Pagan mystics any day of the week) that we base our faith in stories and history. And that our mission is to spread a news report.

The based Saint Paul said “For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness”

[Anonymous No.14470854]

>>14467739
>Anagigoske ton Palama, agrammate Latine.

Wow, the only reason this sounds Greek at all is the word "ton". Is this ancient or modern?
My best guess is this means "he read Palamas written in Latin." What is this?

[Anonymous No.14470860]

>>14468223
He was stacked, not fat. Dude could pull boats that took four men to move

[Anonymous No.14470888]

>>14470839
A-hecking-men. Kinda tripped at the finish line by saying "based Saint Paul" but 10/10 otherwise

[Anonymous No.14470924]

>>14469385
>Why does the pope exist
Christ was a shepherd to His flock, and after His Passion needed someone to lead His Church. This is proven in. . .

>Where in the bible does it say there is a pope
"Whatever you bind on Earth shall be bound in heaven, whatever you loose on Earth shall be loosened in heaven" Paraphrasing, but in the bible Christ gave Peter the keys to heaven and the responsibility of feeding his flock

>But why can't I just do *modernist idea*
I'm stepping into a bit of taboo area here, but provided you're a catholic, the fact that you are constantly tempted to stray from God's path is a given. Demons can be a lot more subtle than poking your thoughts, saying "hey, do this." Without proper guidance, and more importantly the sacraments, things can go very wrong very fast

[Anonymous No.14470955]

>>14470854
It's "Read the Palama, illiterate Latin." in Ancient Greek.

[Anonymous No.14470982]

>>14470888
Thanks. Apologies- but I think that the Apostle Paul was a real alpha male, the ultimate chad, and I know 100% that he’s in heaven right now and is praying for us

[Anonymous No.14470994]

>>14470982
I'm more of a st john the Baptist guy but I won't judge, saints are saints

[Anonymous No.14471027]

>>14470994
Yes true. But I love to bring up Paul because his contribution to the Bible makes it easy to get Protestants to consider finally taking the saint pill.

[Anonymous No.14471050]

>>14471027
Yeah, it's a personal preference for me. I go head over heels trying to save people, it's one hell of a coincidence that John the Baptist was my confirmation saint

[Anonymous No.14471054]

>>14470839
>esp the great “sages” (thank God we don’t have those in our faith, Church Fathers could wreck Pagan mystics any day of the week)
What's the difference?

[Anonymous No.14471079]

>>14471054
A sage is someone who sits around naval-gazing until they experience enough satori to teach other people how to become Boddisattvas.

A father is a parent who begets children in the faith, and shepherds their spirits, and protects them evil and error.

[Anonymous No.14471099]

>>14471054
A sage is someone who sits around naval-gazing until they experience enough satori to teach other people how to become Boddisattvas.

A father is a parent who begets children in the faith, and shepherds their spirits, and protects them from the devil and from error.

[Anonymous No.14471121]

>>14471099
Uhh, alright. I don't think the Church Fathers were contending with Buddhists though.

[Anonymous No.14471131]

>>14471050
A righteous holy martyr hated by the devil. Definitely a good choice. I was baptized as an infant, but i’m halfway through my twenties and still haven’t been confirmed- should I abstain? I already recieved first communion.

[Anonymous No.14471145]

>>14471121
They where contending. Dharmatards tried to spread their doctrine everywhere. Though the only people to fall for it where East Asians.

[Anonymous No.14471187]

>>14467647
Just wondering:
What did scholastics say about theodicy?

[Anonymous No.14471225]

>>14467647
Great but all of Summa is used to prove that god exists. Even if this succeeded there is a leap to prove the existence of christian god.

[Anonymous No.14471241]

>>14471225
There’s no difference between God and the Christian God. All the other gods are only devils.

[Anonymous No.14471332]

>>14467647
>You cant be a solider and a priest

[Anonymous No.14471346]

A vagina so strong she coverts Germany to Christianity

[Anonymous No.14471355]

Listen Kike, debate my Bishop here and now, and let this debate be known for all time
>Bishop has to end up using dubious sources.

[Anonymous No.14471455]

>>14470854
Imperative form of αναγιγνωσκω anagignosko (to read, and other meanings), then Palamas, then vocative form of αγράμματος agrammatos which means ignorant (or illiterate) and vocative form of Λατῖνος, Latin (
[man]. It's ancient although technically acceptable in modern as well besides αναγιγνωσκω which I don't know if it exists or not.

[Anonymous No.14471878]

>>14468571
>Greece
Corpus Hermeticum, Neoplatonism
>Rome
Valentinianism
>Western culture
Renaissance Neoplatonism
>the native Americans
Indian Shakers

we can keep going if you want

[Anonymous No.14471950]

>>14471187
Objection 1. It seems that God does not exist; because if one of two contraries be infinite, the other would be altogether destroyed. But the word "God" means that He is infinite goodness. If, therefore, God existed, there would be no evil discoverable; but there is evil in the world. Therefore God does not exist

Reply to Objection 1. As Augustine says (Enchiridion xi): "Since God is the highest good, He would not allow any evil to exist in His works, unless His omnipotence and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil." This is part of the infinite goodness of God, that He should allow evil to exist, and out of it produce good.

[Anonymous No.14472422]

>>14470839

You're just restating that you do indeed do what the question asks about without explaining why.

[Anonymous No.14472694]

>>14472422
I was explaining that this is what Christians are, that this is what distinguishes us from other groups, and that our ancient predecessors started a religion that keeps alive the spirit of this teaching.

[Anonymous No.14472733]

>>14472694

Yes, but why?

[Anonymous No.14472752]

>>14467647
>be a slave to tyrant of rome
>try to undermine necessity of faith
>try to strip The Lord of His mystery
>fail
laughsinortodox.png

[Anonymous No.14472767]

>>14472733
Because of loyalty to Jesus Christ.

[Anonymous No.14472780]

>>14472733
Because of loyalty to Jesus Christ, and contempt for Satan.

[Anonymous No.14472797]

>>14472752
>stubbornly keeps the church, the mystical body of Christ, divided because of chauvinism and pride
>puts Jesus on trial
>spits on Jesus
>mocks Jesus
>crucifies Jesus

So this is the power of Eastern Schismatics.

[Anonymous No.14472798]

>>14472752
>*allows divorce*

[Anonymous No.14472810]

>>14472797
Church already has The Head in Jesus Christ. It doesn't need a fake, self-appointed tyrant, nor his forged documents.

[Anonymous No.14472835]

>>14472810
But your Eastern Churches need contraception and abortion and divorce?

[Anonymous No.14472843]

>>14472780

Referring to the original question: >>14467672

Would you say the latter is more congruent with that than the former?

[Anonymous No.14472845]

>>14472835
You mean things MORE common under pope?

[Anonymous No.14472870]

>>14472845
in practice maybe, but not not by doctrine which is the only thing that matters. people who actually follow church teachings don't use contraception or get abortions or divorces, but its explicitly allowed in "Orthodoxy"

[Anonymous No.14472879]

>>14472870
>in practice maybe, but not not by doctrine which is the only thing that matters.
Ok, pharisee.

[Anonymous No.14472882]

>>14472845
You mean things forbidden under the Papa, and things that Roman priests in the US will universally condemn in front of all their parishioners? Face it, the Catholic church is more hardcore and more true to the apostolic mission of shepherding the flock. The Orthodox church is spiritually dead. It only lives on as a souless identity totem.

[Anonymous No.14472889]

>>14472879
good argument.

[Anonymous No.14472893]

>>14472882
>Face it, the Catholic church is more hardcore and more true to the apostolic mission of shepherding the flock.
I will pray that veil of delusions will be lifted from your mind.

[Anonymous No.14472900]

>>14472889
Who is one who says one thing and does the other if not a pharisee? Or catholics started to wear this name with pride already?

[Anonymous No.14472903]

>>14472900
they're called sinners, protip: you're one of them, too.

[Anonymous No.14472913]

>>14472903
>it's protestant LARPing as a catholic episode

[Anonymous No.14472926]

>>14472843
>is “Contempt for Satan” more congruent with “revelation achieved through meditation” “Loyalty to Jesus”

Absolutely not. Vedic religions are absolutely adored by the powers of ignorance and death, while those sane powers are terrified of Jesus Christ.

[Anonymous No.14472940]

>>14472843
>is “Contempt for Satan” more congruent with “revelation achieved through meditation” than is “Loyalty to Jesus”

Absolutely not. Vedic religions are absolutely adored by the powers of ignorance and death, while those same powers are terrified of Jesus Christ. And being loyal to one master means hating another master.

[Anonymous No.14472950]

>>14467647

>I define god as the greatest and define existance as a feature of greatness, therefore god exists

Yikes!

[Anonymous No.14472956]

>>14472950
Are you saying that my cock is not the greatest?

[Anonymous No.14472965]

>>14472956
how would you know
?

[Anonymous No.14472972]

>>14472893
Thanks. But how? Should I, an outsider, go to an Orthodox church? They would just redirect me to a Catholic Church. They acknowledge that Rome is the only church with a living apostolic mission. The Orthos have forfeited their inheritence to the Great Commission and to Pentecost.

[Anonymous No.14472978]

>>14472965
There must be the greatest cock. And greatest real cock is more great than greatest imaginary cock since it's real. And even greater one would be mine since it's mine. And there can not be two greatest cocks since one of the would need to be greater. So my cock is the greatest cock.

[Anonymous No.14473013]

>>14472978
the greatest cock to you, maybe but not simply the greatest cock.

[Anonymous No.14473024]

>>14472940

I mean the latter and former things in the question, "cultural and historical factors" and "meditative self contemplation", respectively. Which one is more congruent with loyalty to Jesus and contempt for Satan?

[Anonymous No.14473026]

>>14473013
Objectively greatest cock is better than subjectively greatest cock. So no, my cock is the greatest.
The greatest cock must possess the greatest possible value of:
Greatness
Realness
Miness
Mine has all three.

[Anonymous No.14473027]

>>14472870
>in practice maybe
Citation Needed. I bet these holier-than-thou Orthos live in countries that have more abortion and more contraception than the West. We can easily find priests and bishops in the west telling the laity an uncomfortable truth, but how much do Eastern clergy do this?

[Anonymous No.14473038]

>>14473027
In the west not being filth is considered a virtue, in the east it's still seen as having minimum of decency.

[Anonymous No.14473043]

>>14472797
read Introduction générale à l'étude des doctrines hindoues.

[Anonymous No.14473057]

>>14473024
Cultural and historical factors.
See >>14470839

Christianity is about spreading ‘the news’, telling history and reading and writing stories. It not about teaching the Prajna Yoga technique for metempsychosis-ing into an atomic swan in the iris of Brahma, or some other cheap metaphysical-physiological trickery.

[Anonymous No.14473060]

>>14473026
>Objectively greatest cock is better than subjectively greatest cock.
you just refuted yourself. mineness is not an objective value, so your cock is the greatesst subjective cock, but not the greatest objective cock which is greater than the former.

[Anonymous No.14473068]

>>14473027
thats why i threw in the caveat "maybe." the biggest reason people think orthodoxy is so based and trad is mostly from lack of scrutiny.

[Anonymous No.14473081]

>>14473060
My cock is objectively most belonging to me. Cock that is more mine than my cock is inconceivable.

[Anonymous No.14473084]

>>14473038
Oh Get off your high horse. I have nothing against Russians, and I feel awful for those dumb sanctions. But I bet when they’re lifted your people will trip over themselves trying to live a Western lifestyle and will forget all about this self-righteous preening and posturing.

And you still haven’t answered my accusation that the Orthodox Churches are spiritually dead, and haved ceded authority to Rone.

[Anonymous No.14473093]

>>14473084
>And you still haven’t answered my accusation that the Orthodox Churches are spiritually dead, and haved ceded authority to Rone.
Well, accusation is simply untrue. There is nothing more to say. And I don't know this Rone fellow but he sounds like a swell guy.

[Anonymous No.14473096]

>>14470398
>t. New Atheist shitter
if you’ve even read any atheist after Russell, I can’t respect you.

[Anonymous No.14473095]

>>14473081
look at it this way:
my cock is also mine, so it possesses the same amount of mineness as yours, as does every single cock for its respective owner, therefore if each cock posses the same amount of mineness, then the greates cock would be the one which also possesses other great qualities in addition, namely the shape and feel of it.

[Anonymous No.14473105]

>>14467647
>Guénon
How could he refute him whenever they both agree with one another?

[Anonymous No.14473106]

>>14473095
No, YOUR cock is YOURS. Only mine is objectively mine and thus the greatest.

[Anonymous No.14473113]

>>14473093
>Rone
*Rome

But yes the accusation is true! Just go to a Catholic group and then go to an Orthodox group. The Catholics are concerned with spirituality, while the Orthodox are focused on politics.

[Anonymous No.14473127]

>>14473106
what are you talking about? MY cock is MINE, your cock is the one that is yours you crazy bastard. MY cock is therefore the greatest by YOUR own logic because it is MINE not yours!

[Anonymous No.14473131]

>>14473113
Catholics are concerned with shallow new agey, protestant "spirituality" like consumerists of religion they are. Ortodox fight actual spiritual battles. But I shall no longer concern talking with americans on matters of faith. I can only pray that you will get better.

[Anonymous No.14473143]

>>14473127
Your cock can't be more mine than my own, that's just absurd.

[Anonymous No.14473150]

>>14473143
why do you keep calling MY cock "your cock?" its fucking mine not yours.

[Anonymous No.14473154]

>>14473150
Well, your cock is your cock. My cock is mine cock.

[Anonymous No.14473160]

>>14473057

What makes the Canonical Canonical and the Apocryphal Apocryphal?

[Anonymous No.14473163]

>>14473154
no, my cock is MY cock. my cock is YOUR cock

[Anonymous No.14473165]

>>14473163
>my cock is YOUR cock
Your cock can't be my cock!

[Anonymous No.14473189]

>>14473165
yes, your cock is "my cock" to you, and my cock is mine, so therefore MY cock is the greatest because it is mine to ME and MINE to you, MY cock has the greatest "mineness." your cock has no mineness because it is not mine, nor is it yours because "your cock" can never be yours, it is always someone elese's, n this case MINE.
HAHAHA BOW BEFORE MY COCK PEASANT!!!

[Anonymous No.14473191]

>>14473160
The Apocrypha are Canonical. They just aren’t in the Jewish Bible. So Martin Luther cut them out, which is ridiculous because it implies that Jews have authority to decide Christian doctrine.

[Anonymous No.14473203]

>>14473189
That's absurd. You aren't me therefore your cock cannot possess mineness. It possesses yourness.

[Anonymous No.14473208]

>>14471131
May as well, it is a sacrament after all.
Doing it later gives you the privilege of being able to really dig deep to find a good saint. Most people who get confirmed as kids just skim a 'patron saints' list until they find someone popular they like.
I chose Justin Martyr because I was a pseud who liked philosophy, but later I came around to actually reading his apologies and found them incredibly enlightening re. the nature of the Logos. Funny how that worked out.

[Anonymous No.14473237]

>>14473203
exactly, "your cock" possesses yourness and not mineness, while "my cock" does possess mineness, making MY cock the greatest!

[Anonymous No.14473245]

Does my cock possess mineness or myness?

[Anonymous No.14473249]

>>14473191

I mean in general, including and especially New Testament Apocrypha.

[Anonymous No.14473254]

>>14473237
But how can YOUR cock be MINE? Mine cock is mine, your cock is yours.

[Anonymous No.14473268]

>>14473254
>But how can YOUR cock be MINE?
it can't! that's why your cock is not the greatest and MINE is!
you just don't get it! MY cock will ALWAYS be MINE, and YOUR cock will ALWAYS be YOURS!

you were right all along, MY cock IS the greatest!

[Anonymous No.14473274]

>>14473268
But mine cock is mine. Your cock isn't mine.

[Anonymous No.14473297]

>>14473274
exactly, thank you for finally conceding to my cock

[Anonymous No.14473304]

>>14473297
Mine cock as in mine cock. Not your cock. It cannot be mine by definition.

[Anonymous No.14473306]

>>14467647
He's not the god of your people, jew slave.

[Anonymous No.14473312]

>>14473304
yes, my cock is therefore the greatest and will always be the greatest because it will always be mine and can never be yours.

[Anonymous No.14473320]

WHY ARE PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT COCKS IN AQUINAS THREAD

[Anonymous No.14473324]

>christian arguing turns out to just be a dick measuring contest in the end
pottery

[Anonymous No.14473348]

>>14473324
what does the ontological cock argument have to do with God? thats quite fallacious.

[Anonymous No.14473416]

>>14467883
Human soul yes, but wolf mind

[Anonymous No.14473443]

>>14473416
what about his cock? would it be his or the wolf's?

[Anonymous No.14473506]

>>14467672
Consesus does not grant truth. I always admired the uniqueness of the christian faith as a testament against worldly tendencies

[Anonymous No.14473627]

>>14468223
builtfat dadbod...basically what all women lust after

[Anonymous No.14473648]

>>14473443
Well, it would still be his cock even if it was wolf's.

[Anonymous No.14473751]

>>14473320
Reddit refugees.

[Anonymous No.14473770]

>>14473751
The word cock is written 76 times in this thread.

[Anonymous No.14473781]

>>14473249
Ok. The Church Councils. That was easy.

Reminder to hide all lewd images, go to confession, and pray a rosary for the conversion of /lit/.

[Anonymous No.14473865]

>>14473770
nice cock dubs

[Anonymous No.14474015]

Where to start with Aquinas? I have found two links on Amazon however one is expensive and huge https://www.amazon.com/Summa-Theologiae-Saint-Thomas-Aquinas/dp/1623400147/ref=mp_s_a_1_12?keywords=Thomas+Aquinas&qid=1578169187&s=books&sr=1-12 and the other claims to be the complete works but surely it cannot contain the entire volumes above in a single book? https://www.amazon.com/Theologica-Complete-Single-Thomas-Aquinas/dp/1732190321/ref=mp_s_a_1_7?keywords=Thomas+Aquinas&qid=1578169187&s=books&sr=1-7 And then there is also a penguin classics book but I don't know it'll i trust penguin. Is either one of those links good for Aquinas or are there any other ones you recommend?

[Anonymous No.14474073]

>>14473781

Wouldn't they have to renounce "culture and history" to do so? I don't suppose they claim themselves privy to the appearance of most, if any, texts, so all they really have to put any and all of them in either category is a priori, i.e. "meditative self contemplation".

[Anonymous No.14474140]

>>14474015
just read the summa, its not very hard to grasp

[Anonymous No.14474177]

>>14474073
No. Because Christianity is all stories and all histories, and our doctrines proceed from the stories.

[Anonymous No.14474215]

>>14474177

Why Canonical stories but not Apocryphal ones? And, moreover, whence the distinction itself?

[Anonymous No.14474248]

>>14474215
To fend off the emerging heresies and maintain Catholic orthodoxy.

[Anonymous No.14474267]

>>14474215
>>14474248
Why is this not obvious? Why else would there be church councils, why would a biblical canon be decided? What possible reason- just for the lulz? You can condemn Christianity, but the actions of the early church make perfect sense.

[Anonymous No.14474319]

>>14474267

Referring to the original question: >>14467672

Proponents of "cultural and historical factors" are actually double-dipping, relying on "meditative self contemplation" to even have such things as coherent culture and history in the first place, whereas proponents of "meditative self contemplation" do not and can actually be taken for their word. Talk about serving two masters and such.

[Anonymous No.14474367]

>>14474319
>cultural and historical factors" are actually double-dipping, relying on "meditative self contemplation" to even have such things as coherent culture and history in the first place

Meditation isn’t a master. It’s a practice. Multiple people in scripture tell us to use prayer and meditation. Christianity teaches that the devil is a master, money is a master, lust is a master but only Jesus is the right master.

We’re not double dipping. The Catholic Church exists to proclaim the news, the “evangelion”, and then keep the flock faithful via prayer and meditation.

[Anonymous No.14474414]

>>14471145
What do you think European pagans were lmao
Before abrahamism their was no religious zealotry in the sense of war. Christianity was not organic either. They used the state to force it and disrupted the eternal order and how things have been for thousands of years.

[Anonymous No.14474446]

>>14474414
No. They risked persecution to baptize voluntary converts against the will of Pagan rulers.

[Anonymous No.14474510]

>>14474367

You're missing the point.

[Anonymous No.14474653]

>>14472950
Not even the right argument. Aquinas didn't agree with the ontological argument. And the argument about cocks is stupid anyways, greatness as an attribute naturally conflicts with penis-ness.
>>14474414
There were very few cases of state enforcement of Christianity. Even the Roman empires "persecuting" pagans late in its history was more about stopping the sacrifices.

[Anonymous No.14474686]

>>14474653
>greatness as an attribute naturally conflicts with penis-ness.
how so? i'd say the two go hand-in-hand.

[Anonymous No.14474706]

>>14474510
Your point was this:

Here’s you (paraphrased by me) speaking(typing) your argument: Christianity takes refuge in concrete claims about very specific incidents in very concrete histories concerning very specific cultures.

*But* while us Christians rely so much on history, Christians still use prayer and meditation to increase their zeal and sharpen their understanding of doctrine.

*But* Christians will slander other groups for using meditation.

*And*
Other religious traditions can fully justify themselves with lonely sages and meditation, as long as the sage was the disciple of a legitimate teacher, and as long as his meditation and teaching is orthodox to his tradition.

[Anonymous No.14474767]

>>14468223
Why does the guy on the right have a shaved chin, but a long beard on the rest of his face?

[Anonymous No.14474817]

>>14474510
Was >>14474706 accurate?

[Anonymous No.14474932]

>>14474686
Gaaaaaaaayyy
But greatness in an absolute sense, if it implies necessary existence, necessarily means things like absolute goodness and transcendence.

[Anonymous No.14474942]

>>14474932
what if we say best cock instead of greatest cock?