/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21733588]

Prove to me this book written by anonymous authors, for some reason, was created for a genuine religious movement with no ulterior motives.

[Anonymous No.21733593]

It just is okay...?

[Anonymous No.21733601]

>>21733588
No

[Anonymous No.21733607]

>>21733593
>>21733601
You vill prove zis book and you vill be happy.

[Anonymous No.21733637]

>>21733588
People far smarter than you have found meaning in it for thousands of years. They're well aware of the criticisms you make regarding its history (e.g. fantasical amendments to the nativity so as to make it accord with prophacy) and also understand how it has been used to service the motivations of bad actors. That doesn't ensure that everything everyone has ever said about it, positive or negative, is truth but it sure hints that you should come toward it with a significant amount of humility. If you read it, odds are you will find truths that provoke your conceptualization of morality as it currently exists and generate a confusion that, if you work hard enough, will leave you wiser on the other side.

[Anonymous No.21733641]

I recently read the Jesus Hoax by Skrbina and, while I don't think he necessarily captures every aspect perfectly, I think that the general premise makes a lot of sense. Prior to reading it, I was struck by the fact that the OT is extremely ethnocentric and the NT is, to a significant extent, xenophilic (and caters to what Nietzsche called chandalas). Apparently Skrbina is coming out with a second edition this year, which I plan to read

[Anonymous No.21733654]

>>21733588
An enemy that numbers time in millennia with a cultural basis that goes back to preliterate man and symbolism rooted in primordial homonids appears!
>[(You)--Choose your fighter]!
a) Richard Dawkins: rat-faced evolutionary biologist who popularized the word meme (secret weapon: Scientism; weakness: Kafka)
b) Sam Harris: midwit who solved the problem of induction (secret weapon: meditiation; weakness: complex thought)
c) Christopher Hitchens: reformed commie/former fag with great talent for rhetoric (secret weapon: alcoholic snark (aka Hitchslap); weakness: Neoconservatism)
d) Daniel Dennett: Saturday morning philosopher (secret weapon: midwit empowerment (aka Reddit); weakness: phenomenology)
>(You): WEAPONIZED CONDESCENTION! ALL FOUR HORSEMEN, I CHOOSE (You)s!
*****[Fight!]*****
>(You) choose: YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN SANTA CLAUS, DO YOU?!
[Counter attack: nuance. Enemy isn't 4 and is unimpressed you don't believe in Santa. Attack is ineffective.]
>(You) choose: WHY DON'T YOU WORSHIP ZEUS?!
[Counter attack: nuance. Even myth is meaningful in a way not reducible to materialism. Attack is ineffective.]
>(You) choose: SCIENCE THOUGH!
[Counter attack: nuance. Enemy brings up the history of science and its complex relationship and continuing interplay with religion. Attack is ineffective.]
>(You) choose: FEDORA TIP!
[Counter attack: enemy is laughing.]
>(You) choose: NO YOU!
[Counter attack: enemy is laughing.]
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>[(You) have fainted.]

[Anonymous No.21733669]

>>21733588
oy vey goyim, you've got to turn the other cheek and give away all your possessions and if an authority figure demands labor, do twice the labor, if the state demands your shirt, give your cloak too. Render unto Caesar, goyim, pay your taxes. Love your enemies, goyim, if you don't forgive, your heavenly father won't forgive you. Oh, what's this? Your society is being overrun by foreigners intent on destroying your culture? Just tolerate it goyim, it's what Jesus would have wanted!

[Anonymous No.21733671]

>>21733637
>People far smarter than you have found meaning in astrology for thousands of years. They're well aware of the criticisms you make regarding its history (e.g. vagueness to make it accord with any given prophacy) and also understand how it has been used to service the motivations of bad actors. That doesn't ensure that everything everyone has ever said in the tradition of astrology is true, but it sure hints that you should come toward it with a significant amount of humility. If you study it, odds are you will find truths that challenge your conception of humans' relation to the heavens, and generate a confusion that, if you work hard enough, will leave you wiser on the other side.

[Anonymous No.21733682]

>>21733641
So it is a super secret Jewish plan to dominate the Gentiles hook, line, and sinker or do you think there is more to the story..

[Anonymous No.21733685]

>>21733654
>You either believe in Yahweh, god of the foreskins, or you're an atheist

[Anonymous No.21733701]

>>21733669
Is this exactly what it is tho??

[Anonymous No.21733713]

>>21733669

[Anonymous No.21733734]

>>21733671
"And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:"
Genesis 1:14

"To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;"
Ecclesiastes 3:1-2

[Anonymous No.21733754]

So I'm not really getting good answers to my question especially from Christians.

[Anonymous No.21733770]

how do you suppose anyone would go about doing that?

[Anonymous No.21733773]

>>21733637
Yea, slavery and genocide will make me wiser.

[Anonymous No.21733776]

>>21733682
Personally, I think that history is inevitably complex, Christianity is one of many attempts to create a life-denying gnostic cult (Alexandria at the time was a maladaptive gnosticism factory). The fact that attempts to gentile-ise Christianity has been met with ostracism is particularly telling; I refer in particular to Marcion, who was scythian (ergo a gentile) and suggested dumping the OT (which, when actually read, is one of the most objectionable things about Christianity as a gentile religion). Further, attempts to judaise Christianity have been wildly successful; this of course includes Christian Zionism (the Scofield Bible and Dispensationalism), but it includes protestantism as a whole - one of the good things about Catholicism is that it kept people from reading the OT(!) and realising how jewish it is, and how venal, acquisitive and judomorphic yahweh is. Christianity as a whole, over the course of 2000 years, has served as an incubator for a religion revolving around the worship of a jew and affirming the idea that the jews were, at one point, the only ethnic group singled out by the creator of the universe for succour. Additionally, Christianity (by focusing on the salvation of the individual) makes people passive apropos civilisational decline (consider the meaning of the title of Augustine's 'City of God'! It is in contradistinction to the Earthly city, Rome, which was going down the gutter and eventually collapsed eighty years after Theodosius I's christianisation). The hypothesis that Tom Holland puts forward about Christianity being the fons et origo of liberalism and individualism is true, but it is in fact a damning indictment

I would recommend reading Laurent Guyenot's Unz review articles. When he touches on other topics, I think he is sometimes insightful, and sometimes misses the mark. However, I believe his articles on Christianity may greatly assist in overcoming this 2000-year long psyop (especially The Holy Hook and The Devil's Trick)

[Anonymous No.21733783]

>>21733754
>make unfalsifiable claim
>heh, looks like no one can prove me wrong
s this is the power of atheist intellectualism

[Anonymous No.21733790]

>>21733713
>What is the narcissism of small differences?
>What is controlled opposition?
>What is full spectrum dominance?
Baruch rebbe yeshua hamashiach!

[Anonymous No.21733795]

>>21733734
Did Rupi Kaur write the OT?

[Anonymous No.21733830]

>>21733776
Ok thanks /lit/, I'll read up on what Guyenot has to say on the matter. I am just trying to figure out if this movement was original and if so, is it really the Truth as so many people from history say it is.

[Anonymous No.21733846]

>>21733776
Correction: Marcion was Pontic (not Scythian), it seems, and I forgot to mention that (despite publishing the first know canon of the christian scriptures) he was extirpated as a heretic by the other early church fathers for (in part) pointing out the vileness of the god of the OT

Here are the two Guyenot articles I mentioned:
https://www.unz.com/article/the-holy-hook/
https://www.unz.com/article/the-devils-trick-unmasking-the-god-of-israel/

[Anonymous No.21733981]

>>21733790
>What is unfalsifiability?
You're a retard.

[Anonymous No.21733998]

>>21733588
>this book written by anonymous authors
>anonymous authors
OP is a faggot who never opened the New Testament and everybody who fell for his bait is cut from the same cloth as him.

[Anonymous No.21734052]

>>21733776
Your post was a mixture of pompous Latin one offs, name defecation, and nonsense that only the most pathetic of souls could muster. To summarize and show the sheer embarrassment to intelligence that is your post, if I cut away the cancer of your post, which is nearly all of it, somehow you say that Christianity is at once gnostic and it worships an individual and it descends from an ethnocentric wotship. Each of these contradict one another so which of your absolutely pathetic attempts at critiquing the truth is correct?

[Anonymous No.21734075]

>>21733981
>These jews (the apostles were ALL jews), having been schooled in a jewish book about jews jewishly being jewish and praying to their jewish god (the OT), went on to write a jewish book about one jew in particular, who fulfils the jewish prophecies of the aforementioned jewish jew book, telling the gentiles that there is neither greek nor jew (Gal 3:28), that salvation is of the jews (John 4:22), that 'whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple' (Luke 14:26)... were in fact JEWS acting consciously as jews to undermine those who are not jewish
< your hypothesis is heckin' unfalsifiable

Bit of a weak response


"The Bible is an entirely Jewish document. Front to back, cover to cover, A to Z, Old Testament and New... the morality, the theology, the social attitude, the worldview... all thoroughly Jewish. The Old Testament obiously so; it was written by Jews, about Jews, and for Jews. The same holds for the New Testaent, although with a slight twist; it was written by Jews, about Jews, but *for* non-Jews."
- David Skrbina, The Jesus Hoax

[Anonymous No.21734084]

>>21733981
>These jews (the apostles were ALL jews), having been schooled in a jewish book about jews jewishly being jewish and praying to their jewish god (the OT), went on to write a jewish book about one jew in particular, who fulfils the jewish prophecies of the aforementioned jewish jew book, telling the gentiles that there is neither greek nor jew (Gal 3:28), that salvation is of the jews (John 4:22), that 'whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple' (Luke 14:26)... were in fact JEWS acting consciously as jews to undermine those who are not jewish
>your hypothesis is heckin' unfalsifiable!
Bit of a weak response

"The Bible is an entirely Jewish document. Front to back, cover to cover, A to Z, Old Testament and New... the morality, the theology, the social attitude, the worldview... all thoroughly Jewish. The Old Testament obiously so; it was written by Jews, about Jews, and for Jews. The same holds for the New Testaent, although with a slight twist; it was written by Jews, about Jews, but *for* non-Jews."
- David Skrbina, The Jesus Hoax

[Anonymous No.21734104]

>>21733588
It's written by several different writers with several different writing styles and compiled generations later with some, but not all of the texts of the period. Do you really think something that organic would realistically be composed as some kind of predetermined agenda?

[Anonymous No.21734106]

>>21733981
>These jews (the apostles were ALL jews), having been schooled in a jewish book about jews jewishly being jewish and praying to their jewish god (the OT), went on to write a jewish book about one jew in particular, who fulfils the jewish prophecies of the aforementioned jewish jew book, telling the gentiles that there is neither greek nor jew (Gal 3:28), that salvation is of the jews (John 4:22), that 'whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple' (Luke 14:26)... were in fact JEWS acting consciously as jews to undermine those who are not jewish
>your hypothesis is heckin' unfalsifiable!
Bit of a weak response

"The Bible is an entirely Jewish document. Front to back, cover to cover, A to Z, Old Testament and New... the morality, the theology, the social attitude, the worldview... all thoroughly Jewish. The Old Testament obiously so; it was written by Jews, about Jews, and for Jews. The same holds for the New Testament, although with a slight twist; it was written by Jews, about Jews, but *for* non-Jews."
- David Skrbina, The Jesus Hoax

[Anonymous No.21734111]

>>21734106
Jewish doesn't mean wrong and also ignores that the NT is distinct from the OT.

[Anonymous No.21734115]

>>21734084
>These jews
>ALL jews
>jewish book
>jews jewishly
>jewish god
>jewish book
>jew
>jewish prophacies
>jewish jew book
>jew
>jews
>JEWS
>jews
>jewish
>Jewish
>Jewish
>Jews
>Jews
>Jews
>Jews
>Jews
>non-Jews
Kek, holy rent-free. Yes retard: your claims aren't falsifiable.

[Anonymous No.21734118]

>>21734106
So rent-free you posted it twice (>>21734084).

[Anonymous No.21734122]

>>21734084
>- David Skrbina, The Jesus Hoax
https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Hoax-Pauls-Fooled-Thousand-ebook/dp/B07MTLGLJ5/ref=sr_1_1
This looks like clickbait in book form.

[Anonymous No.21734126]

>>21733588
>genuine religious movement with no ulterior motives
anachronism
religion back then = power structure
so you asking for something impossible

[Anonymous No.21734130]

>>21733998
Anonymous, pseudonymous, whatever, faggot

[Anonymous No.21734158]

>>21734052
>pompous Latin one offs
Latin is... LE BAD?
>only the most pathetic of souls could muster
Ad hominem
>gnostic
"[G]nosticism [refers to] any of various related philosophical and religious movements prominent in the Greco-Roman world in the early Christian era, particularly the 2nd century... By the 2nd century CE, however, the name gnostikoi had been adopted by various Christian groups, some of which used it positively as a self-designation, though others criticized the practice..." (Encyclopaedia Britannica)
'Gnosticism', like 'paganism', is an exclusionary label; it is used, in part, to refer to the other cargo cults which proliferated in the Levant and Egyptian Alexandria around that time - that was the milieu that Christianity arose out of. It seems you failed to comprehend my original post
>worships an individual
I don't really pay to much mind to the nature of the trinity and whatever flavour you ascribe to, but jesus (jewish) and yahweh (judeomorphic god of the jews) are both (along with the ruach hakodesh) constitutive of the divine godhead, no?
>it descends from an ethnocentric wo[r]ship
Have you read the OT, or not?
>Each of these contradict one another
I'm not surprised that the thing I'm critiquing (a jewish trojan horse created by a group of jews to undermine gentiles) is self-contradictory!

>>21734115
The existence of an imperceptible god is unfalsifiable. Does that mean there was no yahweh telling abraham to mutilate his children's genitals, and it was all for nothing?

>>21734111
But (regardless of whether it is distinct), if the OT is true, that means that at one point yahweh did indeed chose the jews alone, out of all the nations (i.e. Jonathan Greenblatt's ancestors, who are presumably in heaven for), and didn't choose europeans (i.e. our pre-christian ancestors, who are now rotting in hell)?

>>21734122
He's a professor of philosophy, what have you done with your life apart from genuflecting to a jewish hippie?

>verification not required

[Anonymous No.21734170]

The idea that the Gospel are all a textual riff on Josephus, ir really funny to me even if it's bullshit

[Anonymous No.21734176]

>>21734158
>Delusional rationalization/disorganized thinking:
There are facts about the world. For example, that media manipulates people, Jews work in media, and psychologists study the mind. However, what a delusional person does is take such facts and use them to confirm a specific narrative (this is known as being selectively coherent). The elements of the narrative aren't actually proven by the facts but the delusional person (or ideologue) confuses their truth with the truth of their narrative. For example: Peterson is a psychologist (fact), associates with Jews (fact), and works in media (fact); therefore he is a skilled manipulator and part of a conspiracy headed by Jews. (This is the delusional rationalization part). The facts don't prove the narrative yet if you look you'll notice they are what is carrying the weight of the argument being made by people who mentally adhere to the narrative--if you deny the narrative these ideologues will confuse this with denying the facts. (That's the disordered thinking part).

Basically, the dangerous thing about paranoid narratives is that they have the appearance of being logically consistent within themselves and noticing the sleight of hand that takes place between the facts and the narrative isn't always easy to do. However, it's quite easy to see why certain narratives are simply absurd (e.g. looking at the advanced teachings of a cult versus those they use to hook people in).

Peterson isn't the crescendo of a multi-millenia conspiracy headed by a cabal of Jews who want you to not have sex. You haven't figured it all out and you aren't interpreting 5D chess. What you are doing is building a selectively coherent narrative based on truisms and confusing that they necessarily connect to your version of reality. If you find yourselves doing this seek professional help.

[Repurposing one of the Peterson Pastas because of your "no you"]

[Anonymous No.21734178]

>>21733783
>make unfalsifiable claim (there is an imperceptable, all-powerful jewish god who needs foreskins for some reason and protected the jews for at least a thousand years before christ)
>heh, looks like no one can prove me wrong
this is the power of jew-worshipping intellectualism

[Anonymous No.21734201]

>>21733685
unironically, yes

[Anonymous No.21734208]

>>21734176
Your strawman was actually very convincing, I'm now going to bow down to a jew on a stick every sunday!

[Anonymous No.21734212]

>>21734208
>obsessed
No one needs to reference jews in order to figure out why you can't breed.

[Anonymous No.21734226]

>>21734201
>The entire world was comprised of atheists before 30 AD
>Homer, Plato, and Aristotle were atheist retards, and I know better than them because I worship a jew

"The Judeo-Babylonian metaphysical hoax makes God not just ridiculously anthropomorphic, but Judeomorphic. To be fooled by it is to mistake the Creator of the Universe for a topical demon rumbling and spitting fire from a Midianite volcano (Exodus 19), adopted as tutelary deity by a confederation of Semitic nomadic tribes craving for a piece of the Fertile Crescent. It is to internalize an extremely primitive and unspiritual image of the divine that is obstructive of sound metaphysical thinking: the divorce between philosophy (the love of Wisdom) and theology (the science of God) is one manifestation of this cognitive dissonance in Western thought. In the final analysis, the jealous Yahweh, destroyer of all pantheons, is so unconvincing in the garb of the Great universal God that he is fated to be discarded in his turn. Atheism is the end result of biblical monotheism: it is the rejection of the biblical God, mistaken for the true God. “If Yahweh is God, no thanks” has been the simple rationale for atheism in Christendom since the Enlightenment: Voltaire, for example, scorned Christianity by quoting the Old Testament. Yahweh has ruined faith in a divine Creator."
- Laurent Guyenot, The Holy Hook

[Anonymous No.21734235]

>>21734212
>ad hominem, no refutation of substance
Enjoy being a eunuch for the sake of heaven!

[Anonymous No.21734253]

>>21734130
>Anonymous
Most of the books are literally named after who wrote them.
They are known people who were big names in the early christian movement

[Anonymous No.21734256]

>>21734212
A most pathetic insult and argument if I had ever seen one, "You can't breed!!!", when in reality many erudite men did not breed and instead preferred to stick to the books. This just reinforces his argument. I just read Guyenot's material btw and it makes loads of sense.

[Anonymous No.21734261]

>>21734253
These "people" are not verifiable. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were just names stuck to these books. That's why it's called pseudonymous instead of anonymous but really it's almost the same thing.

[Anonymous No.21734271]

>>21734235
>REEEEEE AD HOM!
Kek, from the guy who associates everything with the idea of Jewishness. Again, it isn't their fault you can't have sex.
>>21734256
>I MAY NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE SEX BUT THAT LEAVES ME MORE TIME FOR READING!
Holy cope, kek.

[Anonymous No.21734277]

>>21734271
Again you're only reinforcing his argument by making him look smarter than you, you are a colossal self-defeating faggot.

[Anonymous No.21734294]

>>21734277
He couldn't respond to the idea that his argument is representative of delusional rationalization and disorganized thinking.

Hint: when someone starts falling back on accusations of informal fallacies in order to avoid actually meeting the criticisms being made that means the argument is already over and they've lost. They're too stupid to understand they're being disingenuous, nothing constructive will come of further discussion with them, and they deserve to have the locus of their resentment displayed for all to see. In this case it's making fun of you for being incels (which seems to have upset you and therefore enhances it's credability). Cope, retard.

[Anonymous No.21734319]

>>21734294
You're the one ignoring his argument, I didn't see replies to >>21734226, you're just ignoring him and being a disingenuous asshole like you're trying to project here.

[Anonymous No.21734327]

>>21734158
>'Gnosticism', like 'paganism', is an exclusionary label;
Woof you can't even define the contents of a religion or religious school of thought. Gnositicism is not just a label it's a belief in the incarnate Word leading to Gnosis or union with Godhead and also it views the OT to have a different deity. Overall, you just describe belief systems in their situatedness in whatever garbled insanity you misplace it rather than their contents because you have no religious contents with which to grabble.

[Anonymous No.21734332]

>>21734319
That wasn't addressed to me and if he failed to meet my arguments why the fuck should I respond to his spergs? Like I said:
>too stupid to understand they're being disingenuous, nothing constructive will come of further discussion with them, and they deserve to have the locus of their resentment displayed for all to see.
Cope, retard.

[Anonymous No.21734334]

>>21734158
>But (regardless of whether it is distinct), if the OT is true, that means that at one point yahweh did indeed chose the jews alone, out of all the nations (i.e. Jonathan Greenblatt's ancestors, who are presumably in heaven for), and didn't choose europeans (i.e. our pre-christian ancestors, who are now rotting in hell)?
You do not understand chosen as a Jewish person would understand it and it is clear that you do not have enough respect to merit its explaination.

[Anonymous No.21734349]

>>21733588
>ulterior motives
you're a conspiracy theorist.
back up your paranoia with facts and logic.

the original Christians gave up wealth and status, and were being persecuted yet were brave anyway because of Jesus' resurrection 1,993 years ago.

[Anonymous No.21734354]

>>21734332
>I'm going to ignore any arguments I can't refute

Once again, projecting.

[Anonymous No.21734359]

>>21734226
you rejecting Jesus is what they want, anon
you fell for it

[Anonymous No.21734375]

>>21734354
>no you
See what I mean about disingenuous, retard? Besides, you're just posting quotes from a book instead of contextualizing them according to the thread. You're an autist and this is the reason you don't have friends in real life.

[Anonymous No.21734404]

>>21734375
You are so obviously projecting.

[Anonymous No.21734416]

>>21734271
>Kek, from the guy who associates [the group of jews (which, irrefragably, they were) who wrote the NT] with the idea of Jewishness
>>21734349
The original Christians (who all, you'd concede, were Jewish) were already being killed by the Romans (Roman-Jewish wars) and the Hellenes (Maccabees). They didn't have anything to loose and the world to gain, as is demonstrated by the effects of this two-millennium long psyop (the fact that the Romans didn't have their own endlösung for the judenfrage, Christian Zionism, liberalism, white replacement...)
>>21734294
Ignoratio elenchi, doesn't refute the substance of my argument
>>21734294
Argumentum ad lapidem, you're saying my argument is wrong because it's 'delusional' and 'disorganised' without substantiating this accusation.
You seem to be suffering from cognitive dissonance; you will continue to feel discomfort until you find a way of reconciling the contradictions in your worldview.

>>21734359
You (and I assume the other guy I was arguing with) are most likely good people; you've just been lied to. You want to live moral lives and appreciate that things are in a dire state. I obviously don't have a magic cure for these problems, and anyone offering you one is likely a snake oil salesman. However, you don't need the jewish scriptures and a jewish hippie to do so; please, just read the OT and see what an evil demiurge yahweh is. "Belief in a cruel god makes a cruel man" (Thomas Paine, Age of Reason), and belief in an avaricious, gentile-hating, jewish god is not going to end well. I wish you luck, I have other things to be getting on with now...

>>21734256
>I just read Guyenot's material btw and it makes loads of sense
Glad to hear it, my friend; I'm happy I could be of assistance. I would also recommend (some but not all of) Revilo P. Oliver's work; I've moved on from that topic for the time being, and am currently reading Aristotle and the Pre-Socratics, and want to read Gemistos Plethon in the near future. I wish you all the best, ave

[Anonymous No.21734425]

>>21734416
>Ignoratio elenchi, doesn't refute the substance of my argument
Meant for:
>>21734327

[Anonymous No.21734438]

>>21733588
>by anonymous authors
Half of it is signed, idiot. Even if you don't believe it and are one of the schizos saying that each of Paul's letters is by a different person it would still not be anonymous. The rest has authors assigned to it that have better assessment of authorship than the standards of books from antiquity.
>with no ulterior motives.
They explain their motives within the text, so I assume you mean something completely outside the text. Which is a ridiculously unfalsifiable claim. But entertaining it, what kind of "ulterior motives" could the those writers have when it was clear publishing those texts would get them into a world of trouble, which it did?
Are you one of the schizos saying it was a big Jewish plot to scam the goyim on a millenia long keikaru?

>>21734416
>The original Christians (who all, you'd concede, were Jewish) were already being killed by the Romans (Roman-Jewish wars) and the Hellenes (Maccabees).
So they wrote texts to be killed by the pharisees in addition to the others?
The original Christians were Jewish in the sense that the apostles were and form the first core of the Church. Add perhaps the three Marys. They immediately had goyim among them and by all probability goyim were already the majority of Christians before the end of the first apostolic age, as is already indicated by st Paul.

[Anonymous No.21734451]

>>21734404
>no you

[Anonymous No.21734462]

>>21734416
>my argument
Random quote by some unknown book after you sperged about jews. You couldn't address the criticism. Cope, faggot.

[Anonymous No.21734464]

>>21734438
op is a moron, you could try explaining history to him but it'd fall on deaf ears

[Anonymous No.21734467]

>>21733671
>>People far smarter than you have found meaning in astrology for thousands of years.
Damn you must be really dumb then lol

[Anonymous No.21734476]

>>21733654
>weakness: Kafka

[Anonymous No.21734598]

>>21734438
>>21734464
The only difference between anonymous and pseudonymous is that there's a fucking name attached, otherwise the function is pretty much the same in that the author is secret, their identity not known. Again I already addressed this earlier but you all seem so pedantic.

>They explain their motives within the text, so I assume you mean something completely outside the text. Which is a ridiculously unfalsifiable claim. But entertaining it, what kind of "ulterior motives" could the those writers have when it was clear publishing those texts would get them into a world of trouble, which it did?

>A big Jewish plot to scam the goyim on a millenia long keikaru?

I'm not saying this is true but it awfully seems like it. In fact I would argue burden of proof is on you since Evangelicals follow this shit literally, worshipping the Jews themselves. Even the Pope, of the Catholic Church, has even stated that 'within every Christian is a Jew'.

So maybe YOU should explain why it's like this if it isn't a religion just for kingmaking Jews.

[Anonymous No.21734615]

>>21734598
>Even the Pope, of the Catholic Church, has even stated that 'within every Christian is a Jew'.
True and you have very low IQ if you think this is an argument in favor of subversion to the Jews.
>Evangelicals
Ha yes, the Jews prepared their plan so that 1900 years later there would be a weird splinter sect worshipping Jews. Forget about the two millennia in between where the yids were, in addition to all other griefs against them, rightfully accused of killing Jesus and further disliked for it.
So the plan didn't merely fail for so many centuries but backfired massively, until finally boomer protestant televangelists put it to fruition.
The absolute state of larpagans.

[Anonymous No.21734626]

>>21733773
Are you so naive that you don't know wars are inevitable?

What slavery are you referring to my guy?

[Anonymous No.21734642]

>>21734615
If you think that contemporary Catholic church is not subverted by jews you're dumber than the other idiot

[Anonymous No.21734653]

>>21734615
You did not really answer my argument you just lambasted me like so. Why is this religion so heavily fixated on Jews and especially a literal interpretation of it as espoused by Evangelicals? Keep in mind, they're taking it literally, the Word of God, as opposed your branch of Christianity. Surely it must be accurate yes? And even if you wanted to disregard a literal understanding of this book, which you seem to be doing, you are still going to come to the conclusion that you are worshipping Jews, not only Jesus, but other Jews.

[Anonymous No.21734674]

>>21734615
>True and you have very low IQ if you think this is an argument in favor of subversion to the Jews
I'm sure this is a very convincing rebuttal in the eyes of neutral third parties

Christianity allows jews to be both segregated and hated (thus preserving their own cohesion as a people for two millennia), and gives them a protected status (see Sicut Judaeis, consider christian eschatology etc.); it thus hijacks pre-christian antisemitism (which is always bound to exist and, historically, follows the yehudim wherever they go), neutering it and never allowing it to reach its denouement. This is why, de facto (and, 99% of times, de jure), Christianity functions as controlled opposition.
You forget that, prior to the Reformation, most Christians would not have been able to read the Old Testament - Tyndale and the KJV (etc.) changed that. The Bible thus served as an incubator for the conclusions which would follow from widespread reading of (and belief in) the Old Testament. Marcion was mentioned earlier.
Why did Theodor Herzl say 'the antisemites shall be our best friend'? Can you explain to me what he meant by that?
Would jews still exist today if it were not for Christianity, or would the pre-Christian Romans have eventually destroyed them?
>larpagans
I assume this includes Plato and Aristotle?

[Anonymous No.21734808]

>dude these curtains and shit are really cool
>dude just trust me
>trust me bro I have to spend 8 chapters talking about them
What did God mean by this?

[Anonymous No.21734898]

>>21734808
if you consider the temples (and tent preceding it) as a prelude to Jesus then the detailed measurements of the former will be analogous to the later
inb4 schizo: Jesus is the fullfilled Temple where the Father resides in His fullness.
Jesus Himself said: destroy this temple and I will rebuild it in three days.
This means you can deduce Jesus' appearance from reading Leviticus (secular brainiack tryhard route). Or just have the Holy Spirit reveal Jesus to you (don't test God).
Otherwise, why would the word of God go to such effort for a Judaisical thing? Clearly it's still pertinent to the modern spiritual life.

>>21734416
you fell for the "I won't worship the Jewish God" psyop.
you've also been brainwashed into thinking God is "le bad" (very reddit of you)
they want you to think like you do

[Anonymous No.21734951]

>>21734674
>would Jews still exist today
Well the network of Jewish merchants all throughout the near and middle East which the Romans left untouched during and after the various Jewish revolts, it would seem so.
Similarly, the actions of Julian the Apostate or the Muslims would seem to suggest that pagans are more than happy to not only tolerate but actively collaborate with Jews.

>include plato and aristotle
They had an actual pagan faith, a set of natural beliefs, cultic practices, and gods which they deeply believed in.
Modern pagans are attempting to reconstruct something that is completely lost, and quite frankly I doubt the veracity of their faith.
Maybe a few would actually believe and practice as if they believed, but even then its just a "I guess they might have done this" sort of thing.
So yes, it is larping, as you're pretending to be something you're not.

[Anonymous No.21734981]

>>21734674
>prior to the Reformation, most Christians would not have been able to read the Old Testament - Tyndale and the KJV
Well this again isn't true.
In early Christianity scripture and the study of it was widespread due to the more aristocratic and intellectual leadership of the Church from the 4th century onwards.
In eucharistic celebrations the scripture was read, and the practice of the divine Office included readings from the Old and New Testaments.
Monastic communities often had readings of scripture during meals, as did aristocratic courts all across Europe temporally and spatially.
Translations of both the new and old testament (in english) were produced before the KJV or tyndall (who ironically drew from the Masorabic 8th and 9th century texts – Jewish re-writes in order to make it seem the new testament didn't fulfil the prophetic messages of the old).
Similarly translations into the vernacular in other languages existed as well.

People (aka the poor and new money) not being able to read scripture in the middle ages is down to 1. The cost and effort in producing new texts before the printing press, and 2. Most people weren't able to read to the extent of studying scripture.
Literacy was undoubtedly higher than moderns suppose, but this would have been more limited to practical things than theological matters.

[Anonymous No.21735148]

>>21734674
You haven't used enough cool words
Fag

[Anonymous No.21735175]

>>21735148
>Arguments not detected

[Anonymous No.21735180]

>>21733588
it's abriged and redacted in the extreme we need a complete version with all discovered books

[Anonymous No.21735193]

>>21734898
Curtainanon here. I'm going to have to reread the first five books of the OTCagain because I didn't really see the hints, but the "Jesus is the temple, so the early books are prophesizing him" line of thinking doesn't sound unplausible. Thanks bro, sorry for my shitpost earlier

[Anonymous No.21735224]

>>21734898
>you fell for the "I won't worship the Jewish God" psyop.
>they want you to think like you do
So the jews psyop people into NOT worshipping the god of israel and giving the jews a(n at one time) chosen status? Makes perfect sense!
>>21734951
>left untouched
I would recommend that you look into chapter four of Skrbina's book; I take, as one example from 168 BC: "Antiochus Epiphanes... was urged "to wipe out completely the race of Jews..." [...] Antiochus' advisors... "strongly urged [him] to make an end of the race completely."..." (from Skrbina)
>Julian the Apostate
The actions taken by Julian were designed to spite the christians rather than benefit jews, because he saw christianity as a pestilential force (and, lo and behold, the western empire was gone by 476)
>Muslims
also an abrahamic faith, worship a deity (allah) which they believe has identity with yahweh; this was the basis of Dhimmi status and the Pact of Umar. so this does not contradict my argument, but rather extends it
>>21734981
>People (aka the poor and new money) not being able to read scripture in the middle ages is down to 1. The cost and effort in producing new texts before the printing press, and 2. Most people weren't able to read to the extent of studying scripture.
Not to be uncharitable, but this is what I was in fact talking about, and the rest of what you posted is irrelevant. I'm saying that if medieval peasants were being preached to from Deuteronomy and Numbers, and being told that jews (i.e. their tax-collectors, tavern owners, etc. (see e.g. Agobard and Louis the Pius)), they wouldn't have sat there and took it. Now that people CAN read that as and when they so choose, it engenders cognitive dissonance and becomes personified in someone like John Hagee

[Anonymous No.21735232]

>>21735224
*being told that jews were chosen by god, told that they 'shalt lend unto many nations, but... shalt not borrow; ...shalt reign over many nations, but they shall not reign over thee' (Deut 15:6) etc...

[Anonymous No.21735584]

>>21735224
>So the jews psyop people into NOT worshipping the god of israel and giving the jews a(n at one time) chosen status? Makes perfect sense!
It does if you know anything about the history of Christianity and it's antagonistic relationship toward Jews. They had a meltdown over a Mel Gibson movie for fucks sake.

You're just a retarded sperg and in desperate need of reading something other than a 138 pg screed.

[Anonymous No.21735638]

>>21734178
exactly, do you see how stupid your demand is now?

[Anonymous No.21735798]

Hello anons, I have been reading the Bible. I am not the jewish redpiller posting in this thread. I am not trying to insult your faith and just trying to be sincere. I welcome discussion.

But my ancestry is indo-european, and the religion of my ancestors before Christianity spread (and presumably took on some Germanic and Hellenic characteristics) was not Christianity. I understand the argument if you are someone with faith. But being somewhat outside of the faith, the idea that an exclusionary Truth arose and was revealed to one persecuted tribe of people alone and then disseminated from them seems shaky at best. I'm reading the Bible now, and there is quite clearly elements of contempt against Gentiles, and a lot of the discourse saying "oh no there isn't anti-gentile sentiment" seem like cope at best (e.g., the Greek word for dog here is closer to pet). I'm not in disbelief of God as a principle, force, thing, or being that might have presented himself in these texts, but /NOT/ to the exclusion of other faiths or beliefs. I guess that makes me some sort of perennialist or traditionalist? I feel sort of like an in-between soul, if I lean too hard on slave or master morality both bite me with poison. Reminds me of Jung (not verbatim) "God is the hand which reaches out and unites opposite."

[Anonymous No.21735842]

>>21733654
If this isn’t pasta it certainly deserves to be

[Anonymous No.21735870]

>>21735842
I lifted it from warosu. Only seen it a couple of times.

[Anonymous No.21735988]

>>21734226
You don't understand
The Jews are just the worst, even in the bible their own holy book
God gets so pissed at them that he opens up the covenant of promise previously exclusive to them and this makes them seeeeeeethe
like if you had a rich dad who left everything to your more responsible sibling, but the sibling still took care of you, that sort of deep resentful totally unjustified seethe
None of this applies to messianic Jews , of which I know one, who I respect deeply

[Anonymous No.21735999]

>>21733754
My mother was visited by Saint Anthony and was given a message that concerned another person; information that she could not have known otherwise. These things have been proven to me. My mother's experience sounds like a legitimate contact with an angel of light. She wanted to know who visited her in her dream. Some days later she heard a voice in her head say “Saint Anthony.” It turns out that day was his feast day. My mother didn’t even know there was a Saint Anthony nor is she a Catholic.

I have also had psychic experiences where I received information that I could not have known otherwise that was verified by a third party.

All of this is to say that the Spiritual realm is real, and the presence of a Christian angel proves the veracity of the New Testament (to me, anyway).

[Anonymous No.21736004]

>>21735999
Yep
This aligns with my experience.
Spirits are real Jesus is King

[Anonymous No.21736087]

>>21733637
>People far smarter than you have found meaning in it for thousands of years. They're well aware of the criticisms you make regarding its history
That's not true at all, the early christians didn't know of this book - rejecting most of the content and rules of it - and in western and central europe, for most of history, it was forbidden to own a copy of it in ones own native language; meaning that they did not know anything about it, when it was translated many people realized that the church was a corrupt entity and the enlightenment happened.

So no; people didn't find meaning in it for thousands of years nor were aware of any criticisms of it. The moment they were they agreed with the criticisms.

And from a Jesus orientated perspective the translations still are wrong; i.e. there's no church building or priest advocated by paul or jesus, no idolatry of a book, no emulation of the old testament characters, etc.

[Anonymous No.21736260]

>>21736087
What you just wrote isn't true at all. Literacy in general wasn't common; anyone who could read was able to read/understand Latin (the Vulgate was composed in the 4th century). Even the most common arguments from "New" Atheism are hundreds of years old; doubt has been a theological area of consideration going back to the apostles and you seem to have no clue what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.21736355]

>>21733588
>this book written by anonymous author
Do we even know who wrote them?

>a genuine religious movement
Is there such a thing?

>no ulterior motives
Are you genuinely deluded enough to believe religion is anything BUT the pursuit of enligthenment? That isn't a game to achieve the betterment of labor and tax cattle? Can you see they're all about rejoicing on doing what you're told?

[Anonymous No.21736851]

>>21736260
>; anyone who could read was able to read/understand Latin
Translated to Vulgar Latin from Greek from Aramaic, with many of the words purposefully altered to mean things that they didn't mean in the translation from Greek to Latin, with likely other aspects wrong entirely in the cultural translation from the Hebrews to the Greeks.

> Even the most common arguments from "New" Atheism are hundreds of years old
as i said
>> for most of history, it was forbidden to own a copy of it in ones own native language; meaning that they did not know anything about it, when it was translated many people realized that the church was a corrupt entity and the enlightenment happened.

i.e.
Explain to me how you derive moral instruction from a religion which instructs that knowing or aspiring to tell good from evil is the cardinal "original sin". You can't. And you don't.

Oh, I know, it's "complicated" you will say, but then I see no virtue whatsoever in persons who profess to belief in god/s, quite the opposite, so it's expected that when your beliefs are examined you find apologisms for evil conduct laying underneath that sophists drag act of ignorance.

give it up, padre.

[Anonymous No.21736860]

>>21735870
I only saw it recently. It's great and really got the trannies seething.

[Anonymous No.21736872]

>>21736260
>doubt has been a theological area of consideration going back to the apostles
ignorance, in this respect, is what your faith exists upon, e.g. when I point out gaping holes in your theology that are impossible to answer 1,300 or 1,700 yrs ago or today, and which indicate an obvious human author of the "words of god"..

..such as this:
>>Explain to me how you derive moral instruction from a religion which instructs that knowing or aspiring to tell good from evil is the cardinal "original sin". You can't. And you don't.
you declare it to be a matter of 'doubt' which you struggle over, being unwilling to admit the glaring errors in those religions and carrying along anyway, believing it to be some form of superior virtue to believe in evil nonsense.

anyway that's the long and short of the thing.

[Anonymous No.21736890]

>>21735999
Demons messed with your mother's head

>>21733588
>Prove to me this book written by anonymous authors, for some reason, was created for a genuine religious movement with no ulterior motives.
Why should I do that? I have many more better things to do than teach you the truth for no reason.

Give me biblical verses to make me do what you want and I will think about it.

[Anonymous No.21736892]

>>21734626
Wars are not inevitable and even if they were, a morally perfect being should not endorse them. Furthermore, a morally perfect being should not endorse the genocide and enslavement of a defeated enemy.
Christians think it makes sense to go to hell over the smallest sins but slavery and genocide are allright.

[Anonymous No.21736924]

>>21733669
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Jews#Western_and_Christian_antisemitism

>ACK!

[Anonymous No.21736981]

>>21736890
>the truth
lawl, one of these days I'm going to kidnap random christians, put them under lie detector technologies and see what they really think about all of this.

bet you $25 9/10 turn out to be full blown homosexuals.

[Anonymous No.21737023]

>>21733588
What would you do, hold them accountable for writing it? Anyway, they would have been put to death if they revealed their names, and many were. Within the texts themselves they keep people anonymous, like "The disciple whom Jesus loved" or when the earlier ones refrain from revealing the name of the person who cut off the centurion's ear.

[Anonymous No.21737106]

>>21736890
>Demons messed with your mother's head
I doubt it. Her experience is in line with historical encounters with angels of light.

[Anonymous No.21737113]

>>21733776
How can I learn to paint cloth like that?

[Anonymous No.21737124]

Wow y'all really just took the most obvious bait from someone who clearly just wants to "dunk" on christians huh? You guys deserve this shit hole.

[Anonymous No.21737999]

>>21737023
>What would you do, hold them accountable for writing it? Anyway, they would have been put to death if they revealed their names,
IT' THE WORD OF GOD, BUT YEAH UH WE CAN'T TELL YOU THE NAMES OF THE PEOPLE WHO WROTE IT COS THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN AFRAID FOR THEY LIFE when the bible was compiled in the christian eastern roman empire.

fucking idiot

>>21737124
>Wow y'all
HEY THERE SOUTHERN BELLE come hop on my dick

OH FUCK NO THAT'S A CHRIS CHAN

[Anonymous No.21738067]

>>21736872
It's really easy to counter this actually.
The original sin was disobedience, not the knowledge
The knowledge hurt us because we can't handle it basically, because we can't always choose the utmost good.
Through Christ we are redeemed.
God is always right and good by nature so in disobedience we became knowledgable of good and evil, whereas before we only had knowledge of good.

[Anonymous No.21738113]

>>21738067
not so fast christcuck, you can't rationalize away that the sending to hell of all humans (i.e. original sin), and the intercession of jesus, was a punishment for humans desiring to know right from wrong.... and that the religion rests upon this aversion to knowing how to tell good from bad (ignorance towards virtue in character), which is simply dumb barbarism and all vice.

>we can't handle it
You can't handle basic virtue? SHIT yeah that would mean you had to actually improve your character in tangible real world ways (OMG IT'S HARD WORK NOT TO BE A FAGGOT AND A DRUNK - HOW MUCH EFFORT IT IS OMG) rather than just pretending it's all fine (even though you suffer and cause suffering all the time as consequence of ignorance) because you say the words "i believe in a religion".

Pathetic.

[Anonymous No.21738277]

>>21737106
Demons didn't show up yesterday

[Anonymous No.21738296]

>>21733588
No

[Anonymous No.21738308]

>>21733776
Please remain whatever it is that you are and never obey God, if there is one type of the enemies of Israel that I particularly despise is retarded wicked larpagans like you who hate the truth (Torah).

Go be "life affirming" with your whores and sodomites like your ancestors in Greece and Rome

[Anonymous No.21738330]

>>21738113
>a punishment for humans desiring to know right from wrong
Try reading the Bible with rabbinical commentary. You will end up misinterpreting things and end up saying stupid things like that because you are illiterate (and some verses aren't as easy to get).

Eve evidently knew what right and wrong were when she replied to the serpent's dishonest question.

But you aren't here for the truth, you are here to antagonize the Bible and God in general because you have a chip on your shoulder. I have destroyed your type dozens of times in many boards here. You keep repeating the same lies and dishonest garbage your ilk relies to in other to gather more followers to your stupid cause (since society is already a pagan society, you just don't like the results)

[Anonymous No.21738338]

>>21738113
>was a punishment for humans desiring to know right from wrong
Wrong. Punishment for disobedience. Punishment for believing a lie over the truth: the snake says eat of the fruit and you will be like god'
But they were already like god, made in his image, so the disobedience rested on believing a lie.
I'm Christian not a old testament jew, so I can tell right from wrong through the discernment granted me by the holy spirit who dwells in me.
>Its hard
It actually is retard. It's impossible without God and that's why society et al is falling apart at the seams, why fat black trans women tell you 2+2 can sometimes equal 5 and are taken seriously by some
And you trivializing the daily struggle of reality, acting like you don't ever despair or get discouraged, I don't buy that for a second
It's easy to be a condescending prick, it's easy to be arrogant. Discipline is hard. Humility is hard.
And being dismissive of that is cowardice on your part.

[Anonymous No.21738357]

>>21734467
Out to Reddit you dirty little whore

[Anonymous No.21738363]

>>21738330
>You will end up misinterpreting things and end up saying stupid things like that because you are illiterate (
sadly predictable lol ...you see what i fucking mean?

You're in the wrong and you are FORCED to insult and make-up shit to avoid the subject.

> I have destroyed your type dozens of times in many boards here.
with schizophrenic fantasies you make-up, yeah for sure, you fucking pedophile apologist, kike worshiper, queer fucking coward, hope you die in a fire and take your family down with you, chris chan.

[Anonymous No.21738369]

>>21738363
>This whole post
Projection + Cope and seethe

Seek Christ

[Anonymous No.21738413]

>>21738338
>It actually is retard. I
How is it 'hard' to not be a fucking criminal or a liar? This is the depths that you people crawl round in, where you're genuinely fascinated and thrilled at the idea of sucking a cock or getting blind drunk, you don't any better than to 'enjoy' that shit.

> I can tell right from wrong through the discernment granted me by the holy spirit who dwells in me.
No you fucking don't, you take it from a book written by unknown anons and from a barbarian sick cult that the religion first came out of. It's all your own ego biases and ethnic baggage, anon, being raised christian and not a muslim, or you'd be drilling the same lines from some other book to excuse your ridiculous habits.

> trivializing the daily struggle of reality, acting like you don't ever despair or get discouraged, I don't buy that for a second
Despair over what? Life is great. I wasn't a fucking idiot in my early life and didn't make retard life choices that ended me up in the boat of a crack smoking gay pastor. Thinking before acting is one of those things that avoids bad consequences, and none of that comes from some "ghost entity" who possesses you. FER FUCKS SAKE

[Anonymous No.21738418]

>>21738113
Man this is bad. You're talking about the doctrine of original sin that is mainly limited to Calvinists and boomer Baptists in the woods. Not engaging with traditional Christianity at all

[Anonymous No.21738424]

>>21738369
>Lies and Lies and being happy to have gotten a violent reaction from your lies.
I'll pop your eyes out of your head under my boot you filthy little animal, you. Try talking to real people in the real world and spouting this shit, you'll get your face broken apart the moment you come with that two-faced "seek christ" shit you smug little cunt.

Hope your parents get cancer.

[Anonymous No.21738434]

>>21738418
> the doctrine of original sin that is mainly limited to Calvinists and boomer Baptists in the woods. Not engaging with traditional Christianity
Man this is fucking absurd.

If you were wearing a lie detector collar it would be blaring and the bomb attached to it would be about to blow up. What fucking lies you people tell yourselves.

[Anonymous No.21738928]

>>21738308
t. Benjamin Netanyahu

[Anonymous No.21738939]

>>21738308
>whores
Abraham literally prostituted Sarah - have you even read the torah?
Also, you should check out Gmirkin, my friend!

[Anonymous No.21739181]

>>21736851
>Translated to Vulgar Latin from Greek from Aramai
Those who could read had access to the text. Most of them probably read Greek as well but I didn't even have to bring that up to show you're demonstrably wrong. Simple as. Stopped reading there.

[Anonymous No.21739289]

>>21739181
> you're demonstrably wrong. Simple as. Stopped reading there.
you're just using words you've overheard; you haven't demonstrated anything, you've danced around the earlier point and have just claimed something really dumb:
>hose who could read had access to the text. Most of them probably read Greek as well

even kings could not read, for centuries, and you claim they could read latin and greek, what the fucking fuck is wrong with your brain that you would think anybody would believe such an obvious lie?

>"stopped reading there"
lost your humanity right there, inmate no. 21739181

You're missing the entire flaw in your earlier claim anyway; if one guy could read (i.e.priest) then the entire population around were reliant on him for telling them what the "word of god" said - they had no way of knowing without a 3rd party interpretation. Now, how can a people subjected to 'that' make informed decisions and "understand" the ideology if they were never allowed to read it or even hear it? Since so many sermons were in Latin which they couldn't understand either.

The moment literacy was lost and the religion was "practiced" in this way, for the subsequent centuries, people were hearing gibberish and had no idea what they were being told - informed decisions and rational 'thought' did not occur. You want to pretend that these centuries had some 'special' understanding that we poor moderners have lost, but the reality demonstrates otherwise: the sermons, for centuries, were gibberish in foreign language to the audience who derived nothing from it.


And that the Catholics violently opposed common language translations shows that they knew they'd lose their power monopoly when others could actually read from the 'secret book' and didn't have to rely on them. Catholic, incidentally, were a heretical upstart against the roman emperor circa 1086 - having no basis for their authority, nor ability to govern, whatsoever.

[Anonymous No.21739317]

>>21739289
>sperg
I'm not reading all of that, sperg. You tried to argue people couldn't read scripture and therefore critiques of it couldn't exist until the modern era. You neglected the context of historical literacy and tried to dismiss the fact those who were literate could read Latin (and likely Greek) as well. You're wrong. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.21739321]

>>21739181
you ought read more, inmate no. 21739181, it's always extra disgusting to me that english speaking persons have forgotten their own history w/ regards to the filthy european heretics who are at least ignorant. Yours is not ignorance but willful treason, in my opinion.

[Anonymous No.21739331]

>>21739317
"sperg" is that the latest word christcucks use when they lose an argument and lack the humility to abandon their pathetic pride? what was wrong with "fedora"?

o well, tell it to your pastors ballsack when you're next on your knees, faggot.

[Anonymous No.21739340]

>>21737999
It's not even worth responding to you if you think the eastern roman empire was christian at the time of Jesus.

[Anonymous No.21739368]

>>21739340
>
ha wow, you gave away a great deal of your education just then, christcuk, and you're right, it's not worth responding to you anymore - you've made your position and your faith look like a handful of shit being eaten by a mental patient.

[Anonymous No.21739450]

>>21739321
>makes bad argument
>gets called out
>spergs in multple posts instead of admitting he's wrong
You're autistic.

[Anonymous No.21739657]

>>21738939
>Abraham literally prostituted Sarah - have you even read the torah?
Nowhere in the Torah it says the pharaoh layed even a finger on her. In the Oral Torah is even more clear what happened

>Also, you should check out Gmirkin
"His latest book Plato and the Creation of the Hebrew Bible identifies Plato's Laws as a key source for Mosaic law"
This has to be a joke. Greeks now want to steal even the Torah for themselves? Plato was the designer of Feminism (see The Republic book V), of children not being the property of their fathers but of the State and women not being home owners anymore. This is completely against the patriarchal culture of Israel.
Everything you neopagan scum accuse the jews of being responsible for is actually your own doing (from the Canaanites and Greeks-Romans to today). The Book of Maccabees should very well the true faces of the greek scum.

>my friend!
Do not call me friend you wicked scum, you "life affirming" whoremongers and dwellers of sodomites and practicers of pederasty, of human sacrifice and idol worship, like it says in Psalms 1, the end of you enemies of Israel is destruction.

[Anonymous No.21739667]

>>21739657
Pic is from
https://www.kibin.com/essay-examples/the-third-wave-in-the-republic-by-plato-oxXlsHqa

[Anonymous No.21739670]

>>21733588

The new testament was written to promote an watered down version of the jew cult.
You can't remember 613 commandments, that's okay, remember ten.
Oh, you can't remember ten?
Fine, remember two.

[Anonymous No.21739744]

>>21733588
Perhaps try reading the Gospel of Matthew since the imaginary criticism you have in your head is one of the main points The Christ came to earth to address?

[Anonymous No.21739751]

>>21733641
Okay. You haven't read the Bible and neither has Skrbina.
When God called Abram to leave his father's family and continue on to the land of Canaan, God promised that through his descendants “all the families of the earth shall be blessed”
-Genesis 12:3
This is what the entirety of the Bible hinges on.

[Anonymous No.21739776]

>>21739670
You realize you people will be judged for everything you say? Why do you say such stupid things? You clearly don't know what you're talking about

[Anonymous No.21739792]

>>21739751
None of those morons ever read the Bible, at most all they did was reading verses taken from any context at all in atheist blog pages.

They probably were abused by some priest or pastor, hence their emotional attachment to anti-Bible rethorics, it's a real shame but those people not only are burying themselves further into their own damnation, they are also not doing anything to help themselves (besides maybe some quick satisfaction? Who knows)

[Anonymous No.21740022]

>>21733588
read it and see for yourself.
also, you need to look up every prophecy and link to the old testament. picrel is biblical cross references

[Anonymous No.21740663]

>>21739450
"autistic" still not refuting anything i said, fuckscum,

in case this is your mental retardation at work and you dont see how you didnt answer anything: imagine if we were in a court of law and made a case and you followed up with one line insults,

yes. you'd be dragged off to the cells. and would have obviously been recognized ot have been unable to refute the claims of the prosecution.

good day

[Anonymous No.21740699]

>>21739776

I have been reading the Bible daily for over 30 years.

I don't think it is worth reading but I just can't stop anymore, my day feels empty without it.

[Anonymous No.21740721]

>>21739792
>one of those morons ever read the Bib
doesn't dawn on you for a moment that an atheist in La West is 99% going to be a former christian (probably someone raised christian much more than yourself) who know the bible better than you, little turd boy, ..does it

I mean, your takes are always so basic, you know? like you've not really thought it through or read deeply enough or know the history of a thing...

not you personally, you know what mean..
(well obviously you personally hahah)

>>21740699
jesus christ

>>21739744
>the imaginary criticism you have in your head is one of the main points The Christ came to earth to address?
oh and there's all of us thinking he was a would-be reformer for the barbarian jews

> the imaginary criticism you have in your head is one of the main points The Christ came to earth to address
xD LITERALLY WTF FFFFFF XD oh the way you phrased that. you poor simple idiot

like.. not only is jesus literally god, but he literally came to earth to 'prove torah was true' wtf...? oh fucking hell -you're lucky i have work to go to this morning or i'd be here all day to 'dunk' on you, catheterolic

[Anonymous No.21740723]

>>21740699
Either stop reading it or put it into practice. If you don't believe it just bury it or burn it somewhere. Go read some philosophy, romances, whatever it is people read

[Anonymous No.21740735]

>>21739657
>like it says in Psalms 1, the end of you enemies of Israel is destruction.
hahahaha oh shit

you're a jew conspiracy person who seeks to refute and defeat the jews by adopting a lesser version of the jewish religion, taking its histories as your own and by worshiping a jew - the logic of this

[Anonymous No.21740751]

>>21740721
>doesn't dawn on you for a moment that an atheist in La West is 99% going to be a former christian
Yes, and christians don't read the Bible either
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bd-YBJkQBDA&list=PL8CB85C3DF82DF9EB&index=1

>probably someone raised christian much more than yourself
I sure hope so

>who know the bible better than you
I have never, ever, seen any evidence to that in all my time discussing (more like doing a favour to them) with atheists. In this same thread you can see after I pointed how the atheist simply did not even understand Genesis, he simply ignored my response and answered with ad hom
>>21738330
>>21738363

>I mean, your takes are always so basic, you know? like you've not really thought it through or read deeply enough or know the history of a thing...
Do you really have nothing better than do or say other than this? Go read 2 Esdras, the last verses
https://biblia.com/bible/nrsv/2-esdras/7/75-101

Consider for a moment this your only and last chance and I'm doing you a solid favour. I gave all you need to choose, it's up to you know.

[Anonymous No.21740754]

>>21739181
>Most of them probably read Greek as well
Greek literacy in the Late Roman West was not at all a majority of people

[Anonymous No.21740774]

>>21733776
>Alexandria at the time was a maladaptive gnosticism factory

[Anonymous No.21741035]

>>21739776
>Resort to blackmail tactics, like a woman
Anyone who falls for this shit is not a real man

[Anonymous No.21741085]

>>21739317
What book is this? Thanks in advance
>>21739657
>Nowhere in the Torah it says the pharaoh layed even a finger on her
"Say you are my sister, so that it may go well with me because of you, and that my life may be spared on your account.’ When Abram entered Egypt the Egyptians saw that the woman was very beautiful. When the officials of Pharaoh saw her, they praised her to Pharaoh. And the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house." (Genesis 12:13-15)
So, after disclaiming any marital claim over Sarah by saying she was his sister, Sarah and the Pharaoh did what exactly? Played pushpin? If so, why did Abram disclaim the bond of marriage?
>the pharaoh
You're forgetting that the same thing happens with King Abimelech in Genesis 20, where the meaning of 'take' is even more explicit.
"Abraham said of his wife Sarah, ‘She is my sister.’ And King Abimelech of Gerar sent and took Sarah. But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night, and said to him, ‘You are about to die because of the woman whom you have taken; for she is a married woman.’" (Genesis 20:2-3)
If the meaning of 'taken' is not, in essence, an act of prostitution (by Abram's 'giving'), then why is this the nub of the issue when her married status is revealed to Abimelech?
>whores
If we are to return to your original post, there are many examples of prostitution in the old testament I did not mention; one of my favourite is the story of Rahab, prostitute of Jehrico in the book of Joshua - she is in fact the first to mistakenly describe yahweh as the creator of the universe, rather than being a jewish tutelary volcano god
>Gmirkin demonstrates connections between Athenian literature and the Old Testament
<This is wrong because Plato was a feminist!
Can you see how one does not follow from the other? If it bothers you so much, why not read it and provide a refutation of substance?
>you wicked scum
That's not very Christian of you! Why don't you prostrate yourself before the Holy Prepuce and pray for my conversion instead?
>>21739751
>neither has Skrbina
Why don't you read Skrbina before making a ridiculous claim like this

[Anonymous No.21741101]

The only credit Christianity has in the civilizations it helped build. If it didn't have that literally nobody could take the schizo babble seriously but sadly we have to because it produced results.

[Anonymous No.21741104]

I have to say (echoing what an earlier post said) the responses provided by Christians to the discussion supra are disappointing. I'm not sure whether they are trying to convince their interlocutors (which they are failing spectacularly at) or just convince themselves

[Anonymous No.21741119]

>>21741101
I agree with you anon, but the only reason it produced result are due to the aspects of classical civilisation that it absorbed - which it has now largely regurgitated (Thomism, the appropriation of Aristotelianism, is no longer official Catholic doctrine). The renaissance, for example, is so called because of the 'rebirth' of classical knowledge which was exogenous to the christian cultural consensus of the time. Since the Reformation, christianity has been progressively judaised and, since 1492, the disastrous effects of 'neither greek nor jew' have been manifested in the south american continent and elsewhere. We will both be dead before christianity 'produces results' in subsaharan africa

[Anonymous No.21742192]

>>21741085
>then why is this the nub of the issue when her married status is revealed to Abimelech?
Because that was what he was planning to do? Are you retarded? Why would God Himself intervene ONLY after Sarah was raped if He cared enough about her to intervene in both cases? Nowhere it says anyone laid down with her (or "knew her"), which is what the Bible uses to mean sex. In both cases they only took her to their palace where the other women were.

>If we are to return to your original post, there are many examples of prostitution in the old testament I did not mention
Are that braindead larpagan I saw arguing the other day that if some event is described in the Bible (like lot offering his daughters to save the angels or the Sodom inhabitants trying to rape the angels) that automatically means God condones it, despite all the legislation prohibiting it? There are also examples of idolatry in the Bible, yet God does not like it, the same for prostitution. You illiteracy is outraging, but I think you're too cunning to be illiterate, you know the paganism you admire is wicked, and you try to make the Bible seem as wicked as your paganism thorough deceit and distortion.

[Anonymous No.21742203]

>>21741085
>Can you see how one does not follow from the other?
No. If Plato was, and he was, a protofeminist, yet the Torah is the opposite of that, it cannot possibly be that the Torah was a copy of Plato

[Anonymous No.21742232]

>>21741085
>That's not very Christian of you!
Who says I'm a Christian?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bd-YBJkQBDA&list=PL8CB85C3DF82DF9EB&index=1

>Why don't you prostrate yourself before the Holy Prepuce and pray for my conversion instead?
Because a righteous is supposed to be happy when wicked people get what they deserve, a righteous is supposed to hate wicked people like God does. Catholics are not following the Bible. The enemies if Israel (people like you, lgbt activists, people who will not change their ways and continue to be haters of God) are enemies, they're not supposed to be loved like parents and friends who may attack us for religious divergences (those are the enemies you need to love, your brothers and sisters who say things against you because of ignorance)

>There are six things that God hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers.
>The Lord tries the righteous, but His soul hates the wicked and the one who loves violence.
>Confused people shall not stand before Your eyes; You hate all workers of iniquity.

[Anonymous No.21742258]

>>21742192
>that automatically means God condones it
Yahweh telling someone to do something and allowing people to do something means that he condones it, yes. The Jews are allowed to use the services of gentile prostitutes, because Yahweh said so. That's how it works. If you don't like it, find a different religion to play pretend with.

[Anonymous No.21742270]

>>21733588
>my desert, demon-worshipping jew tribe really know what it's all about man!
nah

[Anonymous No.21742549]

>>21740751
who me?

I mean, I'm going to not presume you're the idiot I was talking to this morning - cos fuck that guy - but yes this is true int he vast majority: the "militant atheist" is 9/10 a former christian who was raised in hardcore evil cult and atheism was the way out of it.
i.e. they've grown up around the 'best examples' of christian "fake moralisms" that you might probably name - strict households etc, hypocrite pastors, etc., things the err "4chan convert to catholicsm" would certainly admire and hold as a great goal to emulate, and the formerchristian now atheist knows better.

Now, this isn't true of me. I thought the cult was batshit from the beginning and I'mmoe honest than to pretend this applis to me, BUT the number of legit atheists you'll encounter who do know the bible better than XYZ has demonstrated this to me repeatedly. I don't know how you'd come to the conclusion that the opposite were true... unless, you know, maybe you saw someone talking like kent hovind (or whoever, you can name a better one) and didn't realize the circus act of fallacies in those presentations.

>I'm doing you a solid favour
Sorry, I'm not even agnostic to the claims that the dribbling jews of barbarous judaea, compared to all other humans, had any legitimacy to their local heathen delusions.

Like it or not, if yo're a crustyan or a muslim, you're bowing down to a religion that's far inferior to the civlizations that your people really came from.

Roma, Araba Felix, Gallia, Thrake..
..maybe humanity is cursed o fail because it turned its back on Jupiters Commandments eh? equal validity to say this as to say anything else.

see muh point, homeboy,
EYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Yours respectfully,
(You)
aka
Literally You when you find the answer to the question.

[Anonymous No.21742552]

>>21742258
>and allowing people to do something means that he condones it, yes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrTr3I1C7so
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WREvu9p_4E4

[Anonymous No.21742567]

incidentally humans being tricked into disobeying jupiters commandments (don't eat meat) by false-wisdom, prometheus, is the creation story of the old pagans - that's the real eve, and her weapon is the allure of innocence and false hope.

eden cucks to eve and pretends she isn't evil. fucking cucks. christcucks

[Anonymous No.21742568]

>>21742258
>The Jews are allowed to use the services of gentile prostitutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhxwP9h4_kY

You completely lost your damn mind, I don't think anything short of a miracle would be able to save your ass from hell considering the level of dishonesty, lies and stupidity you have demonstrated so far despite all the correct responses you got

[Anonymous No.21742573]

>>21742270
You realize European deities are the actual desert cult demons right? Baal is Zeus, Asherah is Hera, and so on. European paganism just came from "desert" paganism

[Anonymous No.21742616]

>>21742573
you're referring to the common concepts espoused in a phonetic and cultural heritage by all humans; like how "Ma" means "Mother" in every language.

If anything, your yahweh god is Vulcan, to be honest, who is a volcano god (see: moses and the priestess who shows her arse to him on mt. sinai), and p'tah (literally Father) is the egyptian version of vulcan, "the father" (aka jupiter eldest son and heir),

there's a lot to teach you, little runaway, come to the grove of faunus and bring your weapons to be consecrated for mars.

[Anonymous No.21742629]

>>21742549
>you're bowing down to a religion that's far inferior to the civlizations that your people really came from.
A religion cannot possibly be inferior than a civilization because a religion is not a civilization you moron. You are saying I'm "bowing" to the wrong book because it's far inferior to other writers (the more honest comparison would be comparing books to books, writers to writers).

>Roma, Araba Felix, Gallia, Thrake..
I'm not into worshipping roman emperors as gods, you can take your so advanced wicked civilization with you and go have have your way with your eromenos or whatever debouchery it is pagans did in their free time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Rome

>maybe humanity is cursed o fail because it turned its back on Jupiters Commandments eh?
I don't know what commandments would be those. I know jupiter or zeus was an adulterer, following his example the society very much is, so I don't think anyone is not following jupiter's example

I know for a fact that adultery isn't punished with death today, which is part of the law of God. This is very much lacking.

[Anonymous No.21742634]

>>21742552
>literal rabbi
How often does this guy conduct Metzitzah B’peh, do you think?

>>21742573
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6hF2VTWwwo&ab_channel=BrownUniversity
>>21742232
I thought you originally posted that Israelite video to disavow it, because I give my interlocutors the benefit of the doubt
kekekekekekekek

You're in brain-jail, I tried breaking you out, but you seem to love being a slave to a gentile-hating demiurge too much.

[Anonymous No.21742644]

>>21742629
>a religion is not a civilization
ffs a religion is a product of a civilization, like its art or its music.

>I know for a fact that adultery isn't punished with death today, which is part of the law of God. This is very much lacking.
ah, you're afraid your wife will give up your estates in favor of a slaves cock? just cut it off the slaves cock if it bothers you when she uses her human dildo, what a petty mind to care about such things...

roma invicta

[Anonymous No.21742650]

>>21742567
>incidentally humans being tricked into disobeying jupiters commandments (don't eat meat)
Wait, so pagans are vegans too? So it's even worse than I knew

Not that this wasn't accounted for, larpagans and pagans today are very eager to prohibit anything good and make anything evil the law

>Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
>Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
>Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

[Anonymous No.21742661]

>>21742629
>in_ancient_Rome
see: reforms of augustus; you couldn't keep your job in government if you weren't practicing annual fasting,

ah, there's a lot here, it shouldn't matter to you though; you should be awed at the military discipline alone, as jesus was.


(the Roman soldier said) I am under the authority of my superior officers, and I have authority over my soldiers. I only need to say, ‘Go,’ and they go, or ‘Come,’ and they come. And if I say to my slaves, ‘Do this,’ they do it.”

When Jesus heard this, he was amazed. Turning to those who were following him, he said, “I tell you the truth, I haven’t seen faith like this in all Israel!

obey jesus why dontcha

[Anonymous No.21742668]

The quality of this thread has nosedived

[Anonymous No.21742673]

>>21742661
>ah, there's a lot here, it shouldn't matter to you though; you should be awed at the military discipline alone, as jesus was.
>(the Roman soldier said) I am under the authority of my superior officers, and I have authority over my soldiers. I only need to say, ‘Go,’ and they go, or ‘Come,’ and they come. And if I say to my slaves, ‘Do this,’ they do it.”
>When Jesus heard this, he was amazed. Turning to those who were following him, he said, “I tell you the truth, I haven’t seen faith like this in all Israel!
>obey jesus why dontcha
You are functionally illiterate, your own verses do no say anything about Jesus being impressed with military discipline, but with his faith (a concept that doesn't exist in paganism by the way). Nothing I say will matter because you cannot understand the meaning of the words you read.

[Anonymous No.21742676]

>>21742650
>Wait, so pagans are vegans
no, that's the moral of the story, like in eden, humans did eat meat and so jupiter created pandora to punish you by lulling you into killing yourself through false hope.

But the best examples of the old pagans were vegetarians (fuck vegans); gladiators and roman soldiers were abstinent from anything but bread and tonic water during their time under the banner, augustus himself was a vegetarian, etc.

roman generals mocking barbarians forgoing into battle drunk and with a belly full of meat, ceasars own legion rebelling when being forced not to eat their delicious grain rations and having eat barbarian meat during the winter. etc. etc.

but as I said: >>21742661
>obey jesus why dontcha

[Anonymous No.21742679]

>>21742673
>You are functionally illiterate, your own verses do no say anything about Jesus being impressed with military discipline, but with his faith (a concept that doesn't exist in paganism by the way). Nothing I say will matter because you cannot understand the meaning of the words you read.
and now you're going against jesus himself, christian, what a hole your false religion puts you in.

what a lawl.

anyway as i said, >>21742673
>>obey jesus why dontcha

non nobis domine, non nobis

[Anonymous No.21742705]

>>21742676
I really want to see this romanweeb vegan larpagan fight with a nordic larpagan

[Anonymous No.21742715]

>>21740754
Doesn't matter. Anon tried to say no one could read scripture because it wasn't translated into German/English/French/whatever. It's a lazy argument that ignores historical context in order to inject modern conceptualizations into the past and excuse them. People who were literate, a minority, would have been able to read Latin (and likely Greek, which was the language of the Septuagint used by Early Christians). The idea that atheistic arguments are a new phenomena arrising due to the fact anyone can read the bible is fedora tipping nonsense. If you want to make an argument regarding the factionalization of the Christian church during the Reformation contributing to the eventual development of widespread atheism (one of the things happening during this era was in fact translating the Bible outside of it's linguistic standard) that's one thing. Acting like people were finally unchained and therefore able to read the bible and call it out is nonsense. Even today most Christians and most atheists simply haven't read the bible.

Learned people have been well aware of standard atheistic arguments for thousands of years. Doubt has been a theological area of concern for as long as Christianity has existed (and before). One should read scripture with this in mind; intellectual pride will retard their effort while humility will reward it. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.21743007]

>>21733588
bump

[Anonymous No.21743089]

>>21735224
Your presentation of Christianity under Islam is only sufficient for certain Islamic caliphates.
Christians were taxed to the hilt and, if unable to pay, had their children enslaved and forcefully converted.
Churches were torn down or turned into mosques, with a prohibition on building new ones.
The entire existence of the Janissary core shows how well Christians were treated underneath one of the least harsh Muslim caliphates, only the first caliphate could be called lenient. All those afterwards take varying degrees of robbing Christians of their money to outright genocide.
>Engenders cognitive dissonance
I do apologise but I don't quite understand what you're trying to say.
If Christians were reading the book of Deuteronomy and Numbers this would turn them against jews?
Or what, I really don't get it.

[Anonymous No.21743100]

>>21733588
>show me the evidence!

[Anonymous No.21743114]

>>21742705
why would the roman emperor fight his own varangian guardsmen when plenty of catholic heretics are waiting to be killed by them all?

[Anonymous No.21743126]

>>21742715
>Simple as.
the irony of this is that the christians were the first atheists; ask yourself why your cult of longing for immortality and disregard of all the world was once considered to be atheistic.

[Anonymous No.21743139]

>>21743089
>The entire existence of the Janissary core shows how well Christians were treated underneath one of the least harsh Muslim caliphates,
what was wrong with training europeans to be elite troops? the sultan himself ate with the troops and considered himself a janissary, being obviously white and all.

[Anonymous No.21743163]

>>21743126
Why are you projecting people who disagree with you are Christian?

[Anonymous No.21743187]

>>21742715
>The idea that atheistic arguments are a new phenomena
stupid faggot, we were literally talking about how these argument are not new at all but old, timeless and never refuted; and they only remain this way due to them being true by your lying conduct, eternal christcuck.

> Anon tried to say no one could read scripture because it wasn't translated into German/English/French/whatever. It's a lazy argument that ignores historical context in order to inject modern conceptualizations into the past and excuse them. People who were literate, a minority, would have been able to read Latin
and again, idiot, you gave up talking when I said this only mattered because of "all people" relying on interpretation from a book they couldn't actually read - hence the man martyrs who died at the hands of the catholics for translating those things.

>Acting like people were finally unchained and therefore able to read the bible and call it out is nonsense.
and yet that's exactly what happened; the catholics were removed from power and outlawed in many countries that did so.


Your catholicism is based on you being ignorant of history; and this is why you're unable to understand or overcome modern fake-liberal censorship, because in order to understand it and refute it you'd have to understand how it was thrown off before - when the news desk was the pulpit and the anchor was the catholic priest.

But I think being sandwiched in between two sputting little cocks is where you secretly enjoy being.*

*metaphor

> humility
have some of it, hypocrite.

And before you reply, try hard not to follow the thousand 4chan catholics before you by simply reverting to petty name-calling like you always do. It just demonstrates that you know you're in the wrong and cannot refute anything being said to you.

derp.

[Anonymous No.21743194]

>>21743163
i recognize the person from yesterday, it's mr "simple as", keep up freud.

[Anonymous No.21743231]

>>21743100
so do it lol

[Anonymous No.21743414]

>>21743187
>more sperg
Again, I'm not reading all of that. Your argument is/was demonstrably incorrect. It betrays a myopic personal bias and, more importantly, a poverty of understanding when it comes to the subject at hand.
>>21743194
>I'M NOT PROJECTING!
Kek.

[Anonymous No.21743452]

>>21743414
>null response, insults
well you're just a liar then lol, if I had a case to make and was sincere I would make it, I wouldn't respond with one-liners and cliched internet lingo.

What you're doing is verbal affirmation of your own biases, like chanting to yourself in hopes that if you make these claims repeatedly they'll become true.
SPOILER: they make your position and faith look like dog shit, and informs any educated person that you're displaying the signs of schizophrenia.

[Anonymous No.21743477]

>>21743452
>insults
I pointed out your argument was incorrect based on an appeal to historical context and indicative of personal bias and a myopic/shallow understanding of the content. You started your reply with "stupid faggot." Cope, retard.

[Anonymous No.21743507]

>>21743414
>Your argument is/was demonstrably incorrect.
but you can't tell us why, that's the thing:

twice you were asked, twice you refused to answer
>>you gave up talking when I said this only mattered because of "all people" relying on interpretation from a book they couldn't actually read
>I'm not reading all of that.

>>You're missing the entire flaw in your earlier claim anyway; if one guy could read (i.e.priest) then the entire population around were reliant on him for telling them what the "word of god" said - they had no way of knowing without a 3rd party interpretation. Now, how can a people subjected to 'that' make informed decisions and "understand" the ideology if they were never allowed to read it or even hear it? Since so many sermons were in Latin which they couldn't understand either.
>I'm not reading all of that, sperg

I mean, at what point do you become aware that you're avoiding reality? If I couldn't think of anything else but to say "the other person" was a (random pejorative) I 1) wouldn't even bother, because 2) would be well aware I was wrong, and 3) my cuntish prickish remarks would refute any pretense i had to being a legit devout moral christian.

Fuck, I remember you. You're the guy who does a thing and accuses the other party the second after you do it.
> It betrays a myopic personal bias
i.e. your entire refusal to speak normally to me

then accuse me of
> PROJECTING

oh you made another one
>>21743477
>I pointed out your argument was incorrect based on an appeal to historical context
HAHAHAHAHA WTFFFFFFFFFFF

that's called "citing facts" you lunatic
>an appeal to historical context

HO LY SHIT you are the dumbest literally retarded sociopath ever, mr. simple as. I feel sorry for anyone who knows you IRL

>You started your reply with "stupid faggot." Cope, retard.
I'm telling the truth based on your interactions in avoiding the subject and insulting,
1) your dumb cos u think those lies work
2) your faggot cos u lie

simple as.

[Anonymous No.21743512]

"by their works you will know them,"
&
"those who claim to know god but by their actions they deny him,"

[Anonymous No.21743516]

>>21743507
>another massive sperg
Again, not reading all of that:

>Anon tried to say no one could read scripture because it wasn't translated into German/English/French/whatever. It's a lazy argument that ignores historical context in order to inject modern conceptualizations into the past and excuse them. People who were literate, a minority, would have been able to read Latin (and likely Greek, which was the language of the Septuagint used by Early Christians). The idea that atheistic arguments are a new phenomena arrising due to the fact anyone can read the bible is fedora tipping nonsense. If you want to make an argument regarding the factionalization of the Christian church during the Reformation contributing to the eventual development of widespread atheism (one of the things happening during this era was in fact translating the Bible outside of it's linguistic standard) that's one thing. Acting like people were finally unchained and therefore able to read the bible and call it out is nonsense. Even today most Christians and most atheists simply haven't read the bible.
>Learned people have been well aware of standard atheistic arguments for thousands of years. Doubt has been a theological area of concern for as long as Christianity has existed (and before). One should read scripture with this in mind; intellectual pride will retard their effort while humility will reward it. Simple as. [>>21742715]

[Anonymous No.21743531]

>>21743516
>not reading all of that, sperg
then you're in the wrong and cannot answer and are just an immoral liar.

Good job making your faith look so bad, schizo.

[Anonymous No.21743535]

>>21743516
>and again, idiot, you gave up talking when I said this only mattered because of "all people" relying on interpretation from a book they couldn't actually read - hence the man martyrs who died at the hands of the catholics for translating those things.
also,
ref: >>21743187
>>and again, idiot, you gave up talking when I said this only mattered because of "all people" relying on interpretation from a book they couldn't actually read

[Anonymous No.21743540]

>>21743531
>more projection/seethe
Anon tried to say no one could read scripture because it wasn't translated into German/English/French/whatever. It's a lazy argument that ignores historical context in order to inject modern conceptualizations into the past and excuse them. People who were literate, a minority, would have been able to read Latin (and likely Greek, which was the language of the Septuagint used by Early Christians). The idea that atheistic arguments are a new phenomena arrising due to the fact anyone can read the bible is fedora tipping nonsense. If you want to make an argument regarding the factionalization of the Christian church during the Reformation contributing to the eventual development of widespread atheism (one of the things happening during this era was in fact translating the Bible outside of it's linguistic standard) that's one thing. Acting like people were finally unchained and therefore able to read the bible and call it out is nonsense. Even today most Christians and most atheists simply haven't read the bible.

Learned people have been well aware of standard atheistic arguments for thousands of years. Doubt has been a theological area of concern for as long as Christianity has existed (and before). One should read scripture with this in mind; intellectual pride will retard their effort while humility will reward it. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.21743555]

>>21743535
>multireplies again
Please contain your seethe a single pose (multiples ones are even less necessary when you're failing to respond). inb4 another sperg.

[Anonymous No.21743573]

>>21743540
>>more projection/seethe
holy shit you're intellectually empty, no conscience whatsoever.

> The idea that atheistic arguments are a new phenomena
in the post you replied to a while ago i pointed out that we 'both' weren't ever saying this, you're repeating a strawman you made up. - i guess? or you're an actual schizophrenic..

Actually, my sanity isn't worth talking in circles to you anymore. You belong in a psychiatric hospital.

[Anonymous No.21743591]

>>21743555
accusing me of failing to respond after i accuse you of failing to repsond, that's some dark schizo shit right there
see prev: >>21743573
>you're intellectually empty, no conscience whatsoever.

I just wanted to add that when you read about christians being grabbed and their guts cut open in the streets, i hope you realize how you contributed to the general climate of impasse in the public conversation.

good night, escaped mental patient.

[Anonymous No.21743595]

>>21743573
>no you
Yawn.

Anon tried to say no one could read scripture because it wasn't translated into German/English/French/whatever. It's a lazy argument that ignores historical context in order to inject modern conceptualizations into the past and excuse them. People who were literate, a minority, would have been able to read Latin (and likely Greek, which was the language of the Septuagint used by Early Christians). The idea that atheistic arguments are a new phenomena arrising due to the fact anyone can read the bible is fedora tipping nonsense. If you want to make an argument regarding the factionalization of the Christian church during the Reformation contributing to the eventual development of widespread atheism (one of the things happening during this era was in fact translating the Bible outside of it's linguistic standard) that's one thing. Acting like people were finally unchained and therefore able to read the bible and call it out is nonsense. Even today most Christians and most atheists simply haven't read the bible.

Learned people have been well aware of standard atheistic arguments for thousands of years. Doubt has been a theological area of concern for as long as Christianity has existed (and before). One should read scripture with this in mind; intellectual pride will retard their effort while humility will reward it. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.21743602]

>>21743595
enjoy your ban for troll spam, mr. simple as.

[Anonymous No.21743605]

>>21743573
>>21743591
See >>21743555. Again, not reading all of that. Ask your doctor about Haloperidol.

[Anonymous No.21743617]

>>21743602
>I'M TELLING ON YOU!
Kek. How pathetic.

[Anonymous No.21743618]

>>21743605
Ask your job search coach about getting a job.

[Anonymous No.21743627]

>>21743617
well you're spamming shit, trolling with one-liners and emotional abuse "NAH I WONT READ" and repeating over and over a chunk of text that refers to no claim that was ever made.

it's just psychopathy to provoke violence against christians, imo.

[Anonymous No.21743641]

>>21743617
tbf i'd beat you until your kidneys failed if you did this IRL

[Anonymous No.21743643]

>>21743618
I'm not interested in a flame war with someone who isn't clever enough to hit back in a way that won't entertain 3rd parties. Call your mom and ask find out why she waited until her late 30s to get pregnant, sperglord. Have a good life.

[Anonymous No.21743661]

anywaaaaay i'm fucking done xd

YOU SEE THIS, /LIT/? THIS IS WHY RELIGION WILL BE DISAPPEARED IN THE FUTURE. PEOPLE LIKE THIS.

just for your own edification.

>>21743617
>>21743605
>>21743595
>>21743555
>>21743540
>>21743516
>>21743477
>>21743414
>>21742715

>>21739450
>>21739317
>>21739181

[Anonymous No.21743664]

>>21743661
Holy shit, calm down retard. You were wrong about something on the internet. Stop turning it into a life event, kek.

[Anonymous No.21743667]

>>21743643
>hit back in a way that won't entertain 3rd parties
you know trolling outside of /b/ is also a ban offense, good luck with your two 30 day bans there, mr. simple as.

[Anonymous No.21743730]

>>21743643
>>21743664
again... you've only been asked to respond to something and you've engaged in abuse and troll spam when you couldn't answer it, with responses steadily increasing in their level of inversion of reality.

Next time when I spot this I'll report it earlier on, about here was when you should've been blocked: >>21739317
>I'm not reading
not the fucking 20th time you responded that way lol

>have a nice life
yeah, you too buddy, good luck bothering strangers on the internet and making all christians seem like evil psychos for your malding incel pharma addled friends on discord.

[Anonymous No.21743733]

>>21743667
Take it easy, anon. Refusing to read your off topic spergs (that begin with "stupid faggot") isn't "emotional abuse." If you want to respond directly to the posts, not rant and rave because a stranger proved you wrong on the internet, fine. Otherwise just stop--you're arguing with a phantom in your own head.

Atheistic arguments aren't a new phenomena. People much more learned than you or I have had them in mind alongside their faith for millenia. Understanding such and approaching religious scripture, regardless of the particular religion, with humility will pay off more than servicing an intellectual pride that only feeds one's own personal hubris. Simple as. Good luck.

[Anonymous No.21743756]

>>21743661
>THIS IS WHY RELIGION WILL BE DISAPPEARED IN THE FUTURE.
Pretty sure it's atheism if we go by fertility rates

[Anonymous No.21743820]

>>21743733
>Atheistic arguments aren't a new phenomena.
> proved you wrong on the internet
holy fucking shit ......................................... we both agreed this yesterday, psycho. Posting this over and over again is not a refutation to the point of people not knowing anything about the religion due to not being able to speak Latin (to read or understand anything in the sermon) and relying on priests to interpret things for them.

If Kings and Dukes could not read, for several hundred years, and if the sermons were given in a dead language and if the books we forbidden to be translated to be read by anybody who could read..... then this means that, as I said yesterday, that nobody in the christian countries had any idea what the religion was about for all that time.

going back to yesterday, my replies, there are several actual pillars to what I said that are unrefuted:
>>21736087
1)
>the early christians didn't know of this book - rejecting most of the content and rules of it -
2)
>and in western and central europe, for most of history, it was forbidden to own a copy of it in ones own native language; meaning that they did not know anything about it, when it was translated many people realized that the church was a corrupt entity and the enlightenment happened.

3)
>So no; people didn't find meaning in it for thousands of years nor were aware of any criticisms of it. The moment they were they agreed with the criticisms.

4) also i suppose 1)
>And from a Jesus orientated perspective the translations still are wrong; i.e. there's no church building or priest advocated by paul or jesus, no idolatry of a book, no emulation of the old testament characters, etc.

you replied,
>>21736260

I replied,
>>21736851

then you "stopped reading"
>>21739181
having addressed nothing of the case presented to you.


If you want to try again, go ahead. I'm still more interested in the subject than this dumb trolling shit you guys have been wasting your lives on. lawl

[Anonymous No.21743853]

>>21743756
atheists are just former religiots, so they'll carry along i'm sure. Like: a miltant atheist today is a devout christian yesterday. But their character is still informed by the same evil influence; it's that influence that'll be bombed to dust or educated out of infants, whichever. latter more preferable of course.

[Anonymous No.21743889]

>>21739317
>You tried to argue people couldn't read scripture
>and therefore critiques of it couldn't exist until the modern era
also, no. I didn't say that 2nd part ever. Most of what I said rested upon the repetition of these same points throughout history, 1,300 yrs ago, 1,500 yrs ago, 500 yrs ago, to present.


If, perhaps, you hadn't made such a habit out of "not reading" you'd read and understand what was said, and then IRL wouldn't punch you so often in the face - cos it really seems like you're being a lying psycho when you do this, and perhaps you don't realize how it happens.

[Anonymous No.21743892]

>>21743820
>sperg yet again
Learned people could read scripture. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.21743899]

>>21743889
>multipost sperg yet again
Maybe if you actually addressed the point instead of trying to monopolize the conversation through multiple replies that are beside the point your posts would be worth reading.

[Anonymous No.21743932]

>>21743892
>(the word sperg again)
holy fucking shit, why did i even give you the benefit of the doubt that you might respond normally and engage with the actual subject itself?

note to self. shoot on sight.


Okay, ignoring your verbal abuse,
>>21743892
>Learned people could read scripture (in Latin).
Except ... not Kings, not Dukes, not Guildsmen, not tax collectors, not farmers, not soldiers, not anybody but "learned people" (i.e. commissars) ... that was the point being illustrated to you.

If: 99% of the society including all the people who mattered knew nothing of the religion for that reason, except what the commissar told them, then they knew nothing of the religion.

I think the original point, or whatever, was against your notion that "for so long" people had "found meaning" in the book; when simply they hadn't. If anything, really, this fact demonstrates that the conscience of the priest themselves were the "moral beacon", i.e. a humanist conscience, with little of the moral guidance coming verbally from the priest and not having anything to do with the religion in any literal sense.

But certainly you cannot argue that the proliferation of the translations brought about the enlightenment, as when people could read how evil the character of god was portrayed in the OT, as well as all the immoral and logical errors in it, they recognized it was not really the word of god.

I mean, when I read Eden as an adult and realized that the story of the origin of "original sin" (i.e. the reason for jesus supposedly saving us) was about "God" punishing humans for wanting to know right from wrong, that's pretty fucking awful. However you spin it or spit shine the thing. This realization was never beyond the reasoning of Men, as the point was made in the 4th Century by Emperor Iulianos, etc.

[Anonymous No.21743939]

>>21743899
>Maybe if you actually addressed the point
... uh other than pointing out that I never said what you've been shitposting about all this time?

i'll try again,
>You tried to argue people couldn't read scripture
>and therefore critiques of it couldn't exist until the modern era
no. I didn't say that 2nd part ever. Most of what I said rested upon the repetition of these same points throughout history, 1,300 yrs ago, 1,500 yrs ago, 500 yrs ago, to present.

[Anonymous No.21743951]

>>21743899
you know what, I'l reply for you, fuck it.

>If: 99% of the society including all the people who mattered knew nothing of the religion for that reason, except what the commissar told them, then they knew nothing of the religion.
Perhaps this is where the more benign sort of platitudes 'about' the religion came from; people who knew nothing of it just 'wanted to believe' that a God was about Virtue and Justice, despite no proof of this being written anywhere in the book of the religion.

[Anonymous No.21743986]

>>21743892
i'll reply for you again,
>But certainly you cannot argue that the proliferation of the translations brought about the enlightenment, as when people could read how evil the character of god was portrayed in the OT, as well as all the immoral and logical errors in it, they recognized it was not really the word of god.
The notion of yours also of these "learned men", that I called "commissars" is perhaps not entirely correct; you mean monks. A monk was a person, 2nd or 3rd son, disinherited and sent to a life of celibacy, they were the most contolled persons in the society; trapped entirely, and wouldn't have dared being accused of apostasy to say anything.

Their pleasant 'words' or wishful thinking about "God" being into Nice Things can be rightly considered as stockholm syndrome, in the cases where they went mad, to justify their lfie of misery in exchange for paradise and immortality after their death. And the function they performed was as the state bureaucrats gathering revenues, albeit for a foreign state, i.e. papal catholicism, of which in the ti of the Tudors was counted as being near 70% of the wealth of the land being held by agents of the pope.

these poor slaves "found meaning" - rather, they retreated into their own minds to escape their living hell, and would have welcomed a strike force to liberate them and set their deacons and abbots on fire.

[Anonymous No.21744003]

anyway thanks mr. simple as, you've let me work through a few ideas here and can be credited with a chapter or so on these subjects in my next little book.

much appreciated.

[Anonymous No.21744148]

>>21743932
>>21743939
>>21743951
>>21743986
>>21744003
Holy sperg. Are you actually schizo or are you trolling? There's no point reading all of that because I know it won't directly address the actual point.

It doesn't matter that scripture wasn't translated into x language because learned people (i.e. the few people who were literate) were versed in the language in which it was available (it really is that simple). Merely translating the Bible into lay languages did not result in atheism finally being given the space to take hold (i.e. people were still largely illiterate and even today few atheists, and few Christians for that matter, do not and have not read scripture). As stated before, there is an argument that the factionalization resulting from the Reformation, one of the elements of which was the translation of the Bible (though it must be noted AGAIN that the general populace would remain overwhelming illiterate for centuries and learned people were already well versed in Latin (Vulgate) and/or Greek (Septuagint)), but the idea of the hegemony of the church being broken expressly due to changing the languages in which scripture was available is a shallow argument.

There was no great war between rationality and religion. That's a simplistic myth to which self-indoctrinated fedora tippers attach themselves. The truth of the matter is that learned people have interacted with scripture in various ways for millenia and atheistic arguments aren't anything new. What's more, the relationship between doubt and faith is a well trod theological subject (alongside figuring as a prominent theme of religous-inspired literature) that can even be said to predate organized theology itself. Therefore, learned people far more advanced than yourself and I have found meaning in scripture while tackling the same critiques being raised today. That fact highlights the necessity for humility when it comes to interacting with scripture. Putting forward a false ideologically-laden historical narrative that entertains the idea that you, with all your intellectual pride, somehow stand unique and above everyone else is a poor way to approach the subject. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.21744178]

>>21738424
typically people respond quite well irl
it's on the internet that you get all the vitriol
there's nothing else to say brother, you are coping and seething, blatantly, you aren't arguing in good faith and you don't really want to change your mind you just want to spew venom.
So i again implore you to find Christ, to be redeemed and given the peace that passes understanding

[Anonymous No.21744472]

>>21744178
I think that guy was legit mentally ill.