/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20206164]

Which authors defend our Lord against Nietzschean critiques?

[Anonymous No.20206189]

Chesterton

[Anonymous No.20206267]

>>20206164
Nietzsche defended Christ. He only (rightfully) attacked christianity.

[Anonymous No.20206315]

>>20206164
Wagner responded to Nietzsche with innuendos in a series of articles.

>To what is the preacher bound fast in the pulpit, but to compromises between the utmost contradictions, whose subtleties must necessarily confound our very faith itself and make us ask: Who now knows Jesus?—Historical criticism, perchance? It casts in its lot with Judaism, and, just like every Jew, it wonders that the bells on Sunday morn should still be ringing for a Jew once crucified two thousand years ago.

Obviously a reply to the 113th aphorism of "Human, All too Human":

>On a Sunday morning, when we hear the old bells booming, we ask ourselves: Is it possible that this should be for a Jew, crucified two thousand years ago, who said he was the son of God? The proof of such an assertion is wanting.

[Anonymous No.20206701]

>>20206164
The patristics.

[Anonymous No.20207149]

>>20206267
Christ set up the Catholic Church.

[Anonymous No.20207157]

>>20207149
Lmao

[Anonymous No.20207159]

>>20206164
David Bentley Hart (pbuh)

[Anonymous No.20207229]

>>20207157
> And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

[Anonymous No.20207233]

>>20207149
>>20207229
You WILL worship the Pachamama

[Anonymous No.20207237]

>>20207149
I like this meme

[Anonymous No.20207269]

>>20207233
Don’t leave Jesus because of Judas.

[Anonymous No.20207556]

>>20207149
You WILL let our gay priests be alone with your kids

[Anonymous No.20207558]

>>20206164
Nietzsche

[Anonymous No.20207579]

>>20206164
I can't believe there are still faggots believing in those jewish fairy tales in 2022

[Anonymous No.20207609]

>>20207579
tell the demons in hell that they are just spooks bro

[Anonymous No.20207619]

>>20207609
stop spreading lies on the internet anon

[Anonymous No.20207631]

>>20207619
the concept of "honesty" is a spook

[Anonymous No.20207661]

>>20207609
hell is full, anon; the demons are upon the very earth and they preach your message of life-negation and otherworldly salvation if you enter into covenants with them

[Anonymous No.20207698]

>>20207661
>my life negation is better than your life negation
you are a spook

[Anonymous No.20207736]

>more than a century after his death, The Nietzsch still pisses off christtards

How did he do it?

[Anonymous No.20207759]

>>20207556
The Catholic Church has similar levels of sexual abuse to public schools and Boy Scouts. The Church also forbids those with homosexual tendencies or confused sexual identities to be ordained. Some may lie about their homosexuality, but there is no way to circumvent that. Pope Francis has recently called for tighter psychological examinations of candidates in order to prevent homosexuals from being ordained. The scandals of priests avoiding punishment by being shipped to different parishes was dealt with in the pontificate of St. Pope John Paul II, who made it mandatory that all allegations be turned over to the local police authorities for investigation. The practice itself arose from the prevailing philosophy of the time, which said that such sexual perversions can be cured through therapy. Obviously the practice was a disaster, which is why the Pope quickly acted to shut it down.

[Anonymous No.20207770]

>>20207759
>The Catholic Church has similar levels of sexual abuse to public schools and Boy Scouts
Brutal self own.

[Anonymous No.20207776]

>>20206164
>boy, I'm sure glad I didn't fall for that life denying cult!

[Anonymous No.20207796]

>>20207770
Yeah this a real case of breaking your legs to avoid conscription

[Anonymous No.20207798]

>>20206164
Christians don't care about Nietzsche.

The Christian answer to Nietzsche criticism was basically:
>Who gives a fuck about you?

[Anonymous No.20207809]

>>20207736
See >>20207798

[Anonymous No.20207819]

>>20207798
that's very Christian of them

[Anonymous No.20207835]

>>20207770
>>20207796
Nobody is happy about this by the way. Every Catholic acknowledges that clergy sexual abuse is horrible and does exist. We just don’t like it when people make a minority of priests out to be representative of the whole Church, or act like this is a problem unique to the Church, when similar institutions where adults have authority over children also experience such issues. Really the problem lies with society’s unwillingness to punish criminals and sex offenders, like they do, eg, in Saudi Arabia.

[Anonymous No.20207885]

>>20207835
>the real problem with the church is that it isn't Islamic enough
I am tempted to agree here for the wrong reasons; certainly it would curtail your influence even further

[Anonymous No.20207902]

No need, he condemned himself by his own words.

[Anonymous No.20207907]

>>20207902
seethe chud

[Anonymous No.20207916]

>le abusive priests
Jewish psyop.
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2016/06/14/spotlight-on-double-standards-at-the-boston-globe/

[Anonymous No.20207921]

>>20207885
The Church doesn’t decide the laws. But Shariah Law is more closely related to what a Christian system of laws would look like than are the modern liberal states of our time. Unfortunately the Popes have been speaking against the death penalty recently, which completely goes against all Catholic history and doctrine.

[Anonymous No.20207923]

>>20207916
seethe chud

[Anonymous No.20207926]

>>20207902
>when you don't understand you are being made fun of
the absolute state of christers

[Anonymous No.20207931]

>>20207921
Yes Jesus wanted all transgressors put to death that was very much his message to the people of Galilee

[Anonymous No.20207949]

>>20207931
No, Jesus’s spiritual message was about God’s mercy and justice. But that doesn’t mean that Catholic states shouldn’t enact punishment against criminals for the public Good, or that human justice is odious to God. How can it be, if human justice is a representation of the justice of God, who is Justice itself?

[Anonymous No.20207950]

>>20206164
none. you have to be a retard and/or a hypocrite to be orthodox/fundamentalist in the current year

[Anonymous No.20207974]

>>20207949
humans cannot know other's souls as things in themselves, that's why God is the only legitimate arbitrator of justice.
>but human society cannot function if we do not implement practical justice
And? Life is meant to be a test. You will suffer enormously and you will turn the other cheek. You will own nothing, you will be shot and stabbed, sexually assaulted, and you will accept it all. They pale in comparison to eternal salvation.

[Anonymous No.20207975]

>>20207923
Nigga is using chud as a pejorative LMAO

[Anonymous No.20207985]

>>20207809
And yet here you are. Because you totally don't care

[Anonymous No.20207996]

>>20207975
chud

[Anonymous No.20208000]

>>20207776
And I sure hope Islam isn't the actual right religion, otherwise you're burning along with me

[Anonymous No.20208031]

>>20207974
No, the purpose of the state is to instil virtue in its citizens and secure the public Good from criminals. This is the Catholic conception of the state, explicated first by Aristotle. Thats the difference between the liberal state and the Catholic state: the liberal state is focused on “securing freedoms” and “individual rights” for the purpose of liberty and self-expression, whereas the Catholic state recognises man’s fallen nature, and realises he needs a rod in order to attain virtue, which is true freedom. Your position of lawlessness and anarchy seems completely ludicrous.

[Anonymous No.20208038]

>>20206189
This. I don't know much about it but I do remember seeing it once on EWTN that Chesterton did address Nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.20208040]

>>20206164
Max Scheler

[Anonymous No.20208049]

>>20208031
nonsense, the point of life is suffering and no man can judge another. none of what you said refutes my post

[Anonymous No.20208082]

>>20208049
People are good or bad by habit and personal choice. But personal choice is heavily influenced by habit. Hence the State should exist to steer our habits in a virtuous direction, so that we are pleasing to God. It does this by applying laws so as to prevent us from falling into bad habits. Christianity isn’t about anarchism.

[Anonymous No.20208097]

>>20208082
Judgement of others and resistance to evil contradict Gospel teaching, Read the Sermon on the Mount
>resist not evil

[Anonymous No.20208106]

>>20208097
You need the interpretative tradition of the church in order to interpret the Gospels correctly. Jesus said a lot of things that were not meant to be taken literally, e.g. cut your eye out if it causes you to sin. The Church has never interpreted this passage to advocate for anarchism or lawlessness.

[Anonymous No.20208130]

>>20208106
He says quite clearly not to resist evil in the sermon. Why would he not speak clearly? These are very basic commands.
>resist not evil
What else could he have meant?

[Anonymous No.20208164]

>>20208082
>the State should exist to steer our habits in a virtuous direction, so that we are pleasing to God. It does this by applying laws so as to prevent us from falling into bad habits.
And your conclusion is that Saudi Arabia's legal code is most admirable? If that is your true concern why aren't you a Muslim? You cannot make a thing what it isn't. If Christianity isn't allowing your beliefs to be enforced, why persist larping as a Christian when you could larp as an Islamist? Because your more permissive fellow citizens would find you repulsive? Because you think Christianity is more aesthetically Western? Chose your cargo cult carefully or the right plane won't land.

[Anonymous No.20208168]

>>20208097
>>20208130
The Sermon on the Mount is a lecture telling people on a personal level how to live and find salvation, it isn't about legalism or how to govern a land.

[Anonymous No.20208172]

>>20208168
the government is comprised of persons, and these people cannot function in their official capacities without violating the principles of non-judgement and non-resistance

[Anonymous No.20208174]

>>20208172
therefore the objectives of the state are opposed to gospel doctrine

[Anonymous No.20208176]

>>20208172
>the government is comprised of persons,
the government is composed of n-persons
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cst-J8j3CR0

[Anonymous No.20208178]

>>20207926
>N-NO! LARPING AS A POLISH JEW WAS ACTUALLY BASED!
Typical gaytheist nonsense.

[Anonymous No.20208192]

>>20206164
Nietzsche wasn't against Jesus, retard.
Go read him again.

[Anonymous No.20208206]

>>20206164
>giving a fuck about Neetzsche

[Anonymous No.20208211]

>>20207556
this is because of v2

[Anonymous No.20208212]

>>20208206
>argument

[Anonymous No.20208213]

>>20208164
I am a Christian. I believe in Jesus Christ and his Church. Why would I change my belief for political purposes? Islam is a blasphemous religion which says that Jesus was not the Son of God and was never crucified. Just because I like the legal code of certain Islamic countries doesn’t mean I believe everything about Islam.

[Anonymous No.20208221]

>>20207759
>>20207770
Public schools actually have a far greater amount of sexual abuse: 201 to 29,000 average yearly abuse cases of Catholic priests to public school employees according to the us department of education. Not to mention the amount that all religious leaders commit including jew rabbis which they actively conceal and protect them from media scrutiny.

[Anonymous No.20208226]

>>20208178
Christers larp as them constantly—and consider themselves to be the better followers of Yahweh, give their children their names, rely on cherrypicking of their prophecies and scriptures to support various doctrines of Platonic import and Hebrew fanfiction, etc. If you have a problem with Nietzsche because he is just throwing your own method back at you, you ought to rethink your values.

[Anonymous No.20208227]

>>20206164
Based Nietzsche dabbing on christcucks in the year 122.

[Anonymous No.20208232]

>>20207233
Heresy within the one true church, the Catholic Church, does not invalidate the truth that it is the one true church founded by Jesus Christ. Vatican II and the novus ordo will be abrogated one day and heretics will be expelled.

[Anonymous No.20208234]

>>20208213
>Just because I like the legal code of certain Islamic countries doesn’t mean I believe everything about Islam
Then you can't have Islamic jurisprudence and you WILL worship the Pachamama.

[Anonymous No.20208241]

>>20208232
Ressentiment... against your own church? Christkeks are precious

[Anonymous No.20208256]

>>20208232
There’s nothing heretical about the Novus Ordo or Vatican II. Archbishop Lefevre signed all the VII documents.
>>20208234
Nobody worshipped the Pachamama. The person who presented it to Francis called it “Our Lady of the Amazon”; it was presented as a representation of the Virgin, which is why they venerated it. Was it a good thing to do? No, it was horrible; but just because a Pope sins doesn’t mean the Church is invalidated. Popes have sinned in the past and will continue to do so. There are Popes in hell right now. Catholicism has never taught that Popes are sinless or going to heaven.

[Anonymous No.20208259]

>>20208226
>cherrypicking of their prophecies
This is the argument the jews use against the church. Once again the atheist can only mouth the words the jew has written for them.

[Anonymous No.20208272]

>>20208259
Do you understand that you mouth their words every sunday or are you mentally circumcised

[Anonymous No.20208282]

>>20208259
>its another episode of one abrahamic monotheistic religion criticizing another version of the same abrahamic monotheistic religion

[Anonymous No.20208283]

>>20208272
The jews called themselves "vipers" and "the synagogue of satan"?

[Anonymous No.20208286]

>>20208272
Moses was a Christian.

[Anonymous No.20208296]

>>20208272
you unironically have no idea what you're talking about, learn about Christianity before commenting further

[Anonymous No.20208301]

>>20208256
I don't care whether the pope is with or without sin. That wasn't my point and is some doctrinal point you think having memorized means something in this discussion. My point is that you believe in an anti-ecumenical and medievalist form of Catholicism which does not exist, and also leads you to admire Islam and denounce the church's hierarchy for being insufficiently faithful to what you personally believe it should be. So you are just a protestant larping as a catholic who doesn't like Islam because he is required not to, but lusts for it anyway.

[Anonymous No.20208302]

>>20208282
You retards take the words of the jew at face value and then pretend to be redpilled. "Judaism" as it exists today is babylonian witchcraft opposed to the Bible.

https://archive.org/details/michael-a.-hoffman-judaism-discovered

[Anonymous No.20208313]

>>20206315
Whenever I see the word "innuendo" I assume its sexual

[Anonymous No.20208315]

>>20208283
Yes you have a dispute with them over what their books mean
>>20208286
Extreme cope
>>20208296
You don't rely exegesis of their religious texts for your fanfiction to be considered canon? Why is it called the "New" Testament?

[Anonymous No.20208322]

>>20208302
and "Christianity" as it exists today is babylonian witchcraft opposed to the Quran, so what's your point? all these religions are the fucking same. anabaptists and quakers are maybe the only thing that comes somewhat close to a logical metaphysical system, and even then it gets btfo by Buddhism

[Anonymous No.20208335]

>>20208322
blessed and tathagatapilled

[Anonymous No.20208337]

>>20208301
I don’t believe ecumenism is inherently wrong but I believe that the way it’s practiced in the modern church is. I think we should be having inter-religious dialogue, especially among Christian denominations, but I don’t believe we should make a spectacle of it like at the Assisi meetings for example. I’m a perennialist Catholic; I believe all religions have some truth in them, and this is confirmed by the Council Fathers at Vatican II. I do not desire to be a Muslim because I believe in the Trinity, in Jesus and his Church, not in Islam. I believe that Christianity is consistent with a similar style of legal philosophy to the ones they have in Saudi Arabia. Again what about my position is inconsistent or wrong?

[Anonymous No.20208360]

>>20208337
>Again what about my position is inconsistent or wrong?
That it is entirely at odds with the formal religion, which is itself on life support anyway as a real estate trust and global charitable organization rather than a faithful interpretation of its formerly valued doctrines and scriptures. I suppose this is the conservative disposition in general, to cling to something falling

[Anonymous No.20208396]

>>20208360
It's not entirely at odds with the formal religion. The death penalty is said to be "inadmissible" in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, because of the revisions made to it by John Paul II and Pope Francis. But nobody believes that the Catechism is infallible, and it is consistent for a Catholic to argue against those revisions in light of Catholic history and tradition.
>which is itself on life support anyway as a real estate trust and global charitable organization rather than a faithful interpretation of its formerly valued doctrines and scriptures.
Which "doctrines and scriptures" has the church renounced? Yeah Christianity is declining all across the West (not in Africa though), but why does the fact that people are becoming less religious mean that I should do the same?

[Anonymous No.20208437]

>>20208396
if you believe the church is not infallible in its doctrines and also that it is in steep decline why would you value such a thing?

[Anonymous No.20208520]

>>20208437
The Church is infallible in the sense that it is unable to bind believers to believe something false. Binding means imposing a penalty of excommunication for obstinately holding the belief. So a statement like this from the Council of Trent --
>If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema.
-- is infallible because it is using solemn language to separate those people who say such things from the Church, hence "anathema sit." This is all that was ever meant by ecclesial infallibility.
The Catechism is not an infallible document, nor does it impose any excommunications. We are not bound to assent to everything in it.

[Anonymous No.20208594]

>>20206164
Fustel de Coulanges - Ancient City

[Anonymous No.20208629]

>>20208520
>why would you value such a thing?
didn't answer the question

[Anonymous No.20208640]

>>20208520
>The Church is infallible in the sense that it is unable to bind believers to believe something false. Binding means imposing a penalty of excommunication for obstinately holding the belief
Leaving the technical cope aside, the church is assenting to and upholding values you oppose, yes?

[Anonymous No.20208657]

>>20208629
I am a Catholic. I believe in Christ and the Church. What do you want me to say? It's simply not a good argument to say "other people are not religious anymore so you shouldn't be either!"
>>20208640
It's only "technical cope" if you have a distorted view of ecclesial infallibility. What I said is the only definition Catholics have ever held to.
>the church is assenting to and upholding values you oppose
I am for the death penalty, so I guess yeah on that particular issue the Pope is upholding values I oppose.

[Anonymous No.20208687]

>>20208657
So you prefer the theological doctrines of the Catholic church and the social codes of the Islamic church. This seems a bit pointless since both are branches of the same religion. Instead of "Christ is the Logos" you have "Muhammed is the Messenger," but otherwise same idea of worshiping the one true God of Israel. What is your motive for not correcting this and sticking with a church you believe is deficient?

[Anonymous No.20208736]

>>20207916
>Catholics rape children but jews do too!
Oh, my bad...

[Anonymous No.20208749]

>>20208687
I believe that the laws of Saudi Arabia are a closer expression to the ideal Catholic legal code than are the laws of Ireland for example. You act like I do not support the moral doctrines of the Catholic Church. I absolutely do; which is why I want them enforced with strict laws. On almost all moral issues except the Purdah and polygamy, Catholics and Muslims are united. Yes, it is a bit embarrassing that the leader of the Church is publicly opposed to the death penalty, but I do not believe that it is a death-blow for my position. I simply disagree with the Pope on the death penalty.

[Anonymous No.20208758]

>>20208749
So you will worship the Pachamama

[Anonymous No.20210469]

>>20208749
t. Pachamama worshipper

[Anonymous No.20210476]

>>20207149
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.20210483]

>>20208758
>>20210469
>>20207233
What's wrong with worshipping Pachamama? She seems pretty cool.

[Anonymous No.20210486]

>>20207776
>Get into paradise
>"Oh, God actually rewards those who use objective reasoning instead of falling into tribal cultism! Neat!"
>Meanwhile Christcucks and Muhammadfags burn

[Anonymous No.20210505]

>>20210483
Why would you worship a woman you can't have sex with?

[Anonymous No.20210519]

>>20210505
I could easily have sex with the Earth if I wanted to

[Anonymous No.20210529]

>>20210519
Oh yeah?

[Anonymous No.20210531]

>>20210529

[Anonymous No.20210685]

We are talking about what is essentially people believing in witches in the 21st century, why are you guys taking this seriously?

[Anonymous No.20210778]

>>20208313
>innuendo
it basically means implication or insinuation

[Anonymous No.20210785]

>>20208335
cursed image. Thank God our forefathers embraced Christ.

>I believe that Christianity is consistent with a similar style of legal philosophy to the ones they have in Saudi Arabia

bro aren't they under Sharia? Christianity has a division between Church and state which is not practiced in the caliphate. Either Saudis are unfaithful to their own religion and just vaguely doing something medieval or you're misinterpreting Christianity

[Anonymous No.20211057]

>>20207609
>hell
No such thing, brainlet

[Anonymous No.20211062]

>>20208302
I care about neither Judaism nor Judaism 2.0, the squabbles of semitic desert cults are not my concern
Not my problem

[Anonymous No.20211628]

>>20210785
The idea of seperation of church and state originated in the Enlightenment, there was no such thing in medieval Europe.

[Anonymous No.20211638]

Nietzsche didn’t believe in objective morality, so his arguments don’t hold any weight. Watch Jay Dyer

[Anonymous No.20212049]

>>20208758
>>20210469
Nobody worshipped the Pachamama. The person who presented it to Francis called it “Our Lady of the Amazon”; it was presented as a representation of the Virgin, which is why they venerated it. Was it a good thing to do? No, it was horrible; but just because a Pope sins doesn’t mean the Church is invalidated. Popes have sinned in the past and will continue to do so. There are Popes in hell right now. Catholicism has never taught that Popes are sinless or going to heaven.
>>20210785
No many Popes condemned the division of Church and State. The Syllabus of Errors lists this explicitly as one of the errors of modernity. Pope Pius X said:
> That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him.

[Anonymous No.20212059]

>>20207149
Kekkerino!

[Anonymous No.20212097]

>>20206164
The Bible. I don’t even feel the need to defend Jesus against Nietzsche’s outbursts

[Anonymous No.20212118]

>>20211638
And if you haven't given away all your belongings like Jesus says you should, neither do you

[Anonymous No.20212154]

>>20212118
That only applies to certain monastic orders. Again, you can’t interpret the Bible without the tradition of the Church, otherwise you come to silly conclusions like this. This is exactly why the Church withheld the scriptures from the laity.

[Anonymous No.20212212]

>>20212118
Based and fraticelli, little brother.

[Anonymous No.20212375]

>>20212049
>Nobody worshipped the Pachamama.
>they venerated it
You and Cope Francis are idolators by the definition of your own scriptures. Pretending Pachamama is actually the mother of your volcano God's son is worse than just worshiping it as a pagan idol. At least none of the Israelites thought the golden calf was actually God's mother.

[Anonymous No.20212386]

>>20212154
Those monastic orders didn't exist when the Jesus of the Gospels told you that communism was essential to his religion. And indeed, Ananias and Saphira were executed for refusing to turn over their wealth to the cult members despite promising to. This was clearly of some importance if it made it into your scriptures, that people who don't pledge their wealth to the cause deserve death.

[Anonymous No.20212493]

>>20212375
Yes they presented it as a tribal/primitive depiction of the Virgin Mary, that’s why they called it Our Lady of the Amazon. Catholics and Orthodox do not worship statues; you don’t even know the difference between latria and dulia; you know nothing of our mystic practices. And like I said, Pope Francis should have never brought a pagan idol into the Vatican and venerated it as the Virgin Mary. I don’t have to “cope” about this because nothing in Catholic theology says the Pope will be sinless or will 100% go to heaven. You’re arguing against a distorted version of Catholicism that nobody has ever held to. Why do you think Dante put Popes in hell in his Inferno? It’s starting to seem pointless to attempt to get through to you. You can’t even represent the Pachamama incident honestly. It was bad enough on its own without having to exaggerate and say they were worshipping pagan idols. You have a bone to pick and you’re not interested in the truth.
>>20212386
Jesus said cut your eye out if it causes you to sin. You see, that means nobody except a few lunatics will go to heaven!
Again, your straightforward “common sense” interpretation is utterly worthless. The Bible is not a logic textbook. It contains poetry, deep mystical and moral teachings, metaphors, and so on. The Church is the final authoritative interpreter of the scriptures, and at no time has she declared that all the faithful must sell everything they have. For the lay faithful, these words of Jesus are meant to be taken spiritually, in the sense of rejecting the world and following Christ. Only certain religious orders like the Franciscans take this command literally and swear vows of poverty.
Your individual interpretations are worthless without the tradition of the Church.

[Anonymous No.20212652]

>>20212386
>>20212493
It's immediately obvious in the NT too that such an interpretation, that all men are required holy poverty, cannot be upheld because the very same book makes it clear that the early church did not understand it that way since they do not all practice it.

[Anonymous No.20213142]

Hopefully we will remove Christianity, and the entirety of it's corrupting egalitarian instinct sometime very soon. It has poisoned the West for far too long. I show you from The Antichrist section 57:

—The order of castes, the highest, the dominating law, is merely the ratification of an order of nature, of a natural law of the first rank, over which no arbitrary fiat, no “modern idea,” can exert any influence. In every healthy society there are three physiological types, gravitating toward differentiation but mutually conditioning one another, and each of these has its own hygiene, its own sphere of work, its own special mastery and feeling of perfection. It is not Manu but nature that sets off in one class those who are chiefly intellectual, in another those who are marked by muscular strength and temperament, and in a third those who are distinguished in neither one way or the other, but show only mediocrity—the last-named represents the great majority, and the first two the select. The superior caste—I call it the fewest—has, as the most perfect, the privileges of the few: it stands for happiness, for beauty, for everything good upon earth. Only the most intellectual of men have any right to beauty, to the beautiful; only in them can goodness escape being weakness. Pulchrum est paucorum hominum:[30] goodness is a privilege. Nothing could be more unbecoming to them than uncouth manners or a pessimistic look, or an eye that sees ugliness—or indignation against the general aspect of things. Indigna tion is the privilege of the Chandala; so is pessimism. “The world is perfect”—so prompts the instinct of the intellectual, the instinct of the man who says yes to life. “Imperfection, whatever is inferior to us, distance, the pathos of distance, even the Chandala themselves are parts of this perfection.” The most intelligent men, like the strongest, find their happiness where others would find only disaster: in the labyrinth, in being hard with themselves and with others, in effort; their delight is in self-mastery; in them asceticism becomes second nature, a necessity, an instinct. They regard a difficult task as a privilege; it is to them a recreation to play with burdens that would crush all others.... Knowledge—a form of asceticism.—They are the most honourable kind of men: but that does not prevent them being the most cheerful and most amiable. They rule, not because they want to, but because they are; they are not at liberty to play second.—The second caste: to this belong the guardians of the law, the keepers of order and security, the more noble warriors, above all, the king as the highest form of warrior, judge and preserver of the law. The second in rank constitute the executive arm of the intellectuals, the next to them in rank, taking from them all that is rough in the business of ruling—their followers, their right hand, their most apt disciples.

[Anonymous No.20213154]

>>20213142
Continued:

—In all this, I repeat, there is nothing arbitrary, nothing “made up”; whatever is to the contrary is made up—by it nature is brought to shame.... The order of castes, the order of rank, simply formulates the supreme law of life itself; the separation of the three types is necessary to the maintenance of society, and to the evolution of higher types, and the highest types—the inequality of rights is essential to the existence of any rights at all.—A right is a privilege. Every one enjoys the privileges that accord with his state of existence. Let us not underestimate the privileges of the mediocre. Life is always harder as one mounts the heights—the cold increases, responsibility increases. A high civilization is a pyramid: it can stand only on a broad base; its primary prerequisite is a strong and soundly consolidated mediocrity. The handicrafts, commerce, agriculture, science, the greater part of art, in brief, the whole range of occupational activities, are compatible only with mediocre ability and aspiration; such callings would be out of place for exceptional men; the instincts which belong to them stand as much opposed to aristocracy as to anarchism. The fact that a man is publicly useful, that he is a wheel, a function, is evidence of a natural predisposition; it is not society, but the only sort of happiness that the majority are capable of, that makes them intelligent machines. To the mediocre mediocrity is a form of happiness; they have a natural instinct for mastering one thing, for specialization. It would be altogether unworthy of a profound intellect to see anything objectionable in mediocrity in itself. It is, in fact, the first prerequisite to the appearance of the exceptional: it is a necessary condition to a high degree of civilization. When the exceptional man handles the mediocre man with more delicate fingers than he applies to himself or to his equals, this is not merely kindness of heart—it is simply his duty.... Whom do I hate most heartily among the rabbles of today? The rabble of Socialists, the apostles to the Chandala, who undermine the workingman’s instincts, his pleasure, his feeling of contentment with his petty existence—who make him envious and teach him revenge.... Wrong never lies in unequal rights; it lies in the assertion of “equal” rights.... What is bad? But I have already answered: all that proceeds from weakness, from envy, from revenge.—The anarchist and the Christian have the same ancestry....

[Anonymous No.20213180]

The Antichrist section 58:

In point of fact, the end for which one lies makes a great difference: whether one preserves thereby or destroys. There is a perfect likeness between Christian and anarchist: their object, their instinct, points only toward destruction. One need only turn to history for a proof of this: there it appears with appalling distinctness. We have just studied a code of religious legislation whose object it was to convert the conditions which cause life to flourish into an “eternal” social organization,—Christianity found its mission in putting an end to such an organization, because life flourished under it. There the benefits that reason had produced during long ages of experiment and insecurity were applied to the most remote uses, and an effort was made to bring in a harvest that should be as large, as rich and as complete as possible; here, on the contrary, the harvest is blighted overnight.... That which stood there aere perennis, the imperium Romanum, the most magnificent form of organization under difficult conditions that has ever been achieved, and compared to which everything before it and after it appears as patchwork, bungling, dilletantism—those holy anarchists made it a matter of “piety” to destroy “the world,” which is to say, the imperium Romanum, so that in the end not a stone stood upon another—and even Germans and other such louts were able to become its masters.... The Christian and the anarchist: both are décadents; both are incapable of any act that is not disintegrating, poisonous, degenerating, blood-sucking; both have an instinct of mortal hatred of everything that stands up, and is great, and has durability, and promises life a future.... Christianity was the vampire of the imperium Romanum,—overnight it destroyed the vast achievement of the Romans: the conquest of the soil for a great culture that could await its time. Can it be that this fact is not yet understood? The imperium Romanum that we know, and that the history of the Roman provinces teaches us to know better and better,—this most admirable of all works of art in the grand manner was merely the beginning, and the structure to follow was not to prove its worth for thousands of years. To this day, noth ing on a like scale sub specie aeterni has been brought into being, or even dreamed of!—This organization was strong enough to withstand bad emperors: the accident of personality has nothing to do with such things—the first principle of all genuinely great architecture. But it was not strong enough to stand up against the corruptest of all forms of corruption—against Christians....

[Anonymous No.20213186]

>>20213180
Continued:

These stealthy worms, which under the cover of night, mist and duplicity, crept upon every individual, sucking him dry of all earnest interest in real things, of all instinct for reality—this cowardly, effeminate and sugar-coated gang gradually alienated all “souls,” step by step, from that colossal edifice, turning against it all the meritorious, manly and noble natures that had found in the cause of Rome their own cause, their own serious purpose, their own pride. The sneakishness of hypocrisy, the secrecy of the conventicle, concepts as black as hell, such as the sacrifice of the innocent, the unio mystica in the drinking of blood, above all, the slowly rekindled fire of revenge, of Chandala revenge—all that sort of thing became master of Rome: the same kind of religion which, in a pre-existent form, Epicurus had combatted. One has but to read Lucretius to know what Epicurus made war upon—not paganism, but “Christianity,” which is to say, the corruption of souls by means of the concepts of guilt, punishment and immortality.—He combatted the subterranean cults, the whole of latent Christianity—to deny immortality was already a form of genuine salvation.—Epicurus had triumphed, and every respectable intellect in Rome was Epicurean—when Paul appeared ... Paul, the Chandala hatred of Rome, of “the world,” in the flesh and inspired by genius—the Jew, the eternal Jew par excellence.... What he saw was how, with the aid of the small sectarian Christian movement that stood apart from Judaism, a “world conflagration” might be kindled; how, with the symbol of “God on the cross,” all secret seditions, all the fruits of anarchistic intrigues in the empire, might be amalgamated into one immense power. “Salvation is of the Jews.”—Christianity is the formula for exceeding and summing up the subterranean cults of all varieties, that of Osiris, that of the Great Mother, that of Mithras, for instance: in his discernment of this fact the genius of Paul showed itself. His instinct was here so sure that, with reckless violence to the truth, he put the ideas which lent fascination to every sort of Chandala religion into the mouth of the “Saviour” as his own inventions, and not only into the mouth—he made out of him something that even a priest of Mithras could understand.... This was his revelation at Damascus: he grasped the fact that he needed the belief in immortality in order to rob “the world” of its value, that the concept of “hell” would master Rome—that the notion of a “beyond” is the death of life.... Nihilist and Christian: they rhyme in German, and they do more than rhyme....

[Anonymous No.20213793]

>>20213142
>>20213154
>>20213180
>>20213186
gay

[Anonymous No.20213859]

>>20212493
>It was bad enough on its own without having to exaggerate and say they were worshipping pagan idols
But they were! Keep coping about your knowledge of the difference between the latrine and the lavatory dogmas.
>deep mystical and moral teachings
Yes, such as murdering people for not giving all their wealth away. At some point, your cult abandoned this, once it had secured wealthier benefactors (or more commonly, benefactresses), who could be a reliable source of income rather than a one-off. But the story is preserved in Acts, and if you are going to reduce it to a mere fable to teach us a value, then why shouldn't the entire New Testament be reduced to the fictionality of Aesop's Fables?

[Anonymous No.20214503]

>>20206164
Pretty sure David Bentley Hart's magnum opus The Beauty of the Infinite, widely regarded as one of the greatest theological works of the 21st century so far, was specifically about this.

[Anonymous No.20214566]

>>20207835
>Really the problem lies with society’s unwillingness to punish criminals and sex offenders, like they do, eg, in Saudi Arabia

Who’s gonna tell him how Islam in Pakistan leads to bus boys?
Literally the only „men“ in Islamic heaven are „eternal youth“.

[Anonymous No.20214663]

>jesus makes simple commands of his followers
>NOOO HE DIDNT ACTUALLY MEAN THAT, IT WAS A METAPHOR
the amount of mental gymnastics you people perform to try and justify your sinful, worldly nonsense is astounding
you do not deserve salvation

[Anonymous No.20214674]

given luther and nietzsche, what ails the german spirit to incite such hatred for God and truth?

[Anonymous No.20214682]

>>20212493
>our mystical practices
>our
lmfao dude you "e-converted" a month ago wtf is this "our" stuff?

[Anonymous No.20214695]

>>20214674
Yahweh never made a covenant with Germany. They are basically forest Egyptians.

[Anonymous No.20214713]

>>20214682
In general his response is all over the place to deflect from the fact that he will worship the Pachamama. There's no real need to keep up this larp other than the sunken cost of identifying with a non-extant version of the church, which he seems to have some knowledge of, though this is as irrelevant as applying encyclopedic knowledge of the Roman Republic to the contemporary Italian state and proceeding to describe it anachronistically

[Anonymous No.20214984]

>>20214663
>NOOO, You don't understand, I need my heckin money and wealth! Forget about camels and needles, the investing servant story is better (for my selfish worldly greed)!"

[Anonymous No.20214994]

>>20214663
>"NOOO, You don't understand, I need my heckin money and wealth! Forget about camels and needles, the investing servant story is better (for my selfish worldly greed)!"

[Anonymous No.20215460]

>>20206164
hasnt the bibble already been DEBOOOOOOOOOOOONKED?

[Anonymous No.20215482]

>>20207149
This is a good one

[Anonymous No.20215611]

>>20215460
Unironically, yes

[Anonymous No.20215915]

>>20207229
t. has never read acts

[Anonymous No.20216187]

>>20207149
Notice all these kikes attacking you, its how you know you are right.

[Anonymous No.20216350]

>>20214663
Tells us about the time you gave all of your possessions away

[Anonymous No.20216353]

>>20216350
I have and I'm homeless, what's your excuse?

[Anonymous No.20216357]

>>20212154
>follow the Bible
>no wait, not like that, in the way that benefits me

[Anonymous No.20216361]

>>20216353
I'm not stupid, and therefore not a Christian

[Anonymous No.20216463]

>>20206189
Fpbp. To those who don't know, you can find Chesterton's responses to Neetch in his books titled "Heretics" and its companion, "Orthodoxy". The latter is a prosaic masterpiece and I suggest you read it even if you're not Christian.

[Anonymous No.20217082]

>>20216463
He just said that because Nietzsche doesn't have a Greek god body and doesn't go stab people with swords then that means he is wrong.
It's literally just an ad hominem at him personally, and not even his philosophy. But that's the thing, christcucks can't refute him so they resort to ad hominem, now fuck off fatty.

[Anonymous No.20217089]

>>20206267
Based. There was only only Christian and he died on the cross.

[Anonymous No.20217092]

>>20206315
Kek that aphorism reads like a shitpost

[Anonymous No.20217213]

>>20207149
*Orthodox

[Anonymous No.20217259]

>>20207149
*Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

[Anonymous No.20217272]

>>20206315
>perchance

[Anonymous No.20217279]

>>20214674
Luther was the man that restored honour to the one, holy true and unchanging Catholic Church. The Roman Christians split from us in the 16th century, and you should return to the flock. I plead of you

[Anonymous No.20217301]

>>20207609
based

[Anonymous No.20217305]

>>20217082
>It's literally just an ad hominem at him personally, and not even his philosophy.
Doesn't Nietzsche do that a lot himself?

[Anonymous No.20217306]

>>20217279
>Unchanging
>Catholic church
Damn you people are not only retarded but also ignorant of historical facts.

[Anonymous No.20217323]

>>20217305
Maybe read his books and find out.

[Anonymous No.20217349]

>>20213859
>>20214713
The story of Ananias has to do with lying, not refusing to give money. Even if it could be proved that in the very early Church everybody sold their belongings and kept everything in common, it would not matter, because the Church is a living institution, and is able to change its non-essential disciplines. For example in the Medieval ages all clerics were required to wear the tonsure, but this is now no longer required. In the early Church the mass was said in the vernacular, then in the Western Rite it changed to exclusively Latin, and finally after Vatican II it is said in the vernacular again. So there is no inconsistency for Catholics to say the early Church functioned differently from the Medieval church functioned differently from the modern Church. The substance and the doctrines haven’t changed.
Also you just keep repeating your lies about the Pachamama incident even after being corrected. You really are incorrigible.
>>20214663
Did you cut your eyes out? Did you cut your hand off? Do you hate your family and friends? Do you never defend yourself when someone attacks you, but turn to them the other cheek? Do you believe that you are a God? Do you believe that a mountain will throw itself in the Ocean if you pray sincerely for that to happen? Jesus talked about all of these things and yet none of them apply in the straightforward literalistic reading you’re trying to give them. So yes, when Jesus tells the rich man “he who does not renounce everything he owns is not able to be my disciple”, we must interpret it in context of Church tradition. That particular rich man was perhaps best served by taking the command literally and taking vows of poverty like the Franciscans. But for the average layperson it is enough to take the command in a spiritual sense, meaning that we do not put stock in material riches but put our hope in Christ.
Read the Bible, read commentaries, read the Saint’s opinions, learn about Church practice and tradition, and then, if you find fault, criticise. But don’t attempt to criticise a religion you have no understanding of.

[Anonymous No.20217364]

>>20217082
>>20217323
>Chesterton never refuted Neetch
>He just a fat fuck lol and (other gibberish)
Sounds like you read Chesterton's books but had such a bias against his arguments that you read them half-heartedly. What a shame. I expected more from the so-called "enlightened" atheist that you are.

[Anonymous No.20217431]

>>20217364
How can he refute Nietzsche when he just ad hominemed him? And I am suddenly supposed to use some dialectics to prove fat fucks adhoms wrong? Go fuck yourself you disingenuous faggot.
But I'm sure you can spell out the fat fucks clearly non adhom arguments here.

[Anonymous No.20217521]

>>20217349
Ananias and Saphira were murdered for "lying" about the assets they would be giving to the cult. It WAS about money. And you WILL worship the Pachamama.

[Anonymous No.20217527]

>>20217349
>yet none of them apply in the straightforward literalistic reading you’re trying to give them.
So there was no resurrection either? Just the gospel writers being poetic. Happy Easter... I guess

[Anonymous No.20217931]

>>20217521
They were killed by God for lying.
Nobody at the Amazonian synod worshipped Pachamama. You’ve been corrected on this numerous times but you love lies instead of truth. Not responding to your slander and lies anymore.
>>20217527
Yes there was Jesus physically died and physically rose again the Church has always taught this. You’re arguing against your own constructed hermeneutic where everything is either 100% literal or 100% metaphorical. Nobody, not even sola scriptura Protestants, believes that.

[Anonymous No.20218000]

>>20217931
>They were killed by God for lying
They were murdered by greedy millennarian cultists, which the established church moved away from as it became more moderate.
>Nobody at the Amazonian synod worshipped Pachamama
Sorry but if it walks like a duck and quacks like I duck I'll trust my own judgment. If you have a problem with idols you shouldn't be an Abrahamist.

[Anonymous No.20218009]

>>20217931
How do you decide what parts of scripture are factual and which are just fairy tales?

[Anonymous No.20218186]

>>20207149
Pauline heresy.

[Anonymous No.20218257]

>>20206164
Tomberg, Meditations on the Tarot brings him up in multiple places. I think he gets the most attention in the chapter on the Wheel of Fortune. It’s a little more out there than Chesterton but a good read.

[Anonymous No.20218349]

>>20218009
You always read scripture in these four senses:
1) Literal: describing the literal events, what happened, who said what, etc..
2) Allegorical/typological: this is interpreting the Old Testament topologically in reference to the New Testament. For example the Ark of the Covenant is a type of Mary. Melchizedek is a type of Jesus. The Jewish nation is a type of the Church.
3) Tropological: this is moral metaphors and teachings. Doesn’t necessarily have to be literal. For example Jesus’ “cut out your eyes if they cause you to sin” is interpreted tropologically as “excise all temptations from your life”.
4) Anagogical: this is related to heaven, hell, the end times, and prophecies.
Not every single verse can be interpreted in all of these senses. For example it’s unlikely that Job and his friends sat around speaking in highly formalised Hebrew verse to each other, so most of Job isn’t literal. But you can still get a meaningful moral and spiritual interpretation out of it.
The Church is the final authority on these matters though. If your interpretation clashes with what the Church teaches you are wrong. That’s why it’s useful to read commentaries and the Saints.
Now you know the very basics of Catholic hermeneutics you can stop making stupid arguments.

[Anonymous No.20218389]

>>20218349
>Now you know the very basics of Catholic hermeneutics you can stop making stupid arguments.
As soon as you stop insisting stupid stories have even stupider meanings we may get somewhere. Until then, it is baked into the genealogy of the early church that the very first cultists would murder you for not turning over your wealth and affect a sort of omertà mentality with regard to the events for posterity