/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>848173

christianity preaches you must submit to evil no matter what

always turn the other cheek anything else is evil

logic comes from satan and its how he led the catholic church to fall to the evils of science and prosperity

free will and brains in general also come from satan be sure to remove them from ur life

yahweh is good because hes jewish

anything european is evil but jews and black people are good especially moses the black

dont hate christianity because it created communism

communism is good

>>848174

lol

>>848181

I'm being genuine. Please write down your argument against what I said.

>1

This isn't an issue with the God of the Bible its an issue with false human worship. The story of ancient Israel in the Bible is one of them over and over committing idolatry by the worship of false Gods, or adapting their worship of the true God to be like that of their neighboring nations, and they're repeatedly admonished and punished for it.

A more cogent objection in this line is to suggest that Yahweh is merely one of many invented gods in the ancient near east and equally invalid with them, because of similarities in scripture of the various near eastern religions. The response to this is to point out that the old testament as a work in that genre of ANE prophetic literature doesn't make it uninspired or taking from those other religions, it was only inspired at a certain time and place to a certain people.

>2

This line of reasoning presupposes a correct morality (based on what?) and presupposes a social objective of a religious system, rather than a supernatural.

You then need to ask, does any given point of criticism follow from the text?

Yes I agree that Christianity heralds the meek. That's clear in scripture, and that's a good thing. Godly morality is rooted in the two greatest commandments, the second being love of neighbor

>>848185

What does that quote about materialism have to do with it

>>848173

"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day." - John 6:44

>>848189

What's the meaning of this?

>>848191

You don't come to God. God comes to you. And if you still have these poisonous thoughts on your mind, then you've already chosen your side, and displayed your self-righteousness. He has better people to address than you at the moment. God will only call those who have hit the bottom and truly need his help. "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise" - Psalm 51:17

>>848192

>By pagan or Nietchchian logic of worshiping the strong

Not to detract from your post but Jesus encouraged carrying weapons and appearing strong even though He discouraged unproductive use of force. So Jesus also saw virtue in strength. The Christianity is weak meme is a fedora strawman.

>>848193

Yay! I am a good person!

>>848194

It's an inherently left-wing religion thought. The meek, the subservient, the unlucky, the last are glorified.

>>848196

I'm pretty sure Christianity teaches those people will be comforted and receive mercy not that they're necessarily superior. Personally, I think they very often are superior because intelligent people are often abused by the worldly.

>>848197

Alright then.

>>848200

>And those who are victims of this fallen world order of sin will find a place in the Kingdom of God

Isn't this entirely abstract though?

>>848201

Not really. Jesus uses concrete imagery at times to illustrate "good investment" in the Kingdom of God. He himself is a King, who promises to remake Heaven and Earth (not just Heaven), and promised his followers that he prepares a place for them. His parables also allude to riches at times. Just the true kind of riches. Things that any sane man would give his life for, if he knew the true value.

“Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." - Matthew 6:19-21

"Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant looking for fine pearls. When he found one of great value, he went away and sold everything he had and bought it." - Matthew 13:45-46

>>848201

If you want specifics go to St. Thomas. He asserted your spiritual power in the afterlife is determined by how rational your soul is. One reason EMJ gives for masturbation being evil is it fogs your brain and makes it harder to think logically thus harming your soul's rationality.

>inb4 the screeching ortho throws a tantrum over the mention of St. Thomas and EMJ, and accuses me of being someone I'm not

>>848203

Thomas is not from the real Thomas and a false Gnostic writing. It is opposite of teaching about the Kingdom of God. Gnostics, like the Pythagoreans before them (and mystery cults or Scientology to this day) are elitists. They rely on a rigid system of hierarchy, "initiation" levels, and keeping some followers in the dark, while others rule them. It is the opposite of everything Jesus taught: the Gospel is given freely, and the Least shall be the Greatest. Not something limited to a special few with "gnosis".

>>848205

I was talking about St. Thomas of Aquinas not the gnostic gospel of Thomas. Lmao.

>>848203

Ok, Plotinus.

>>848205

That's just as sad. You're the Logic guy then? Your worldview relies on Rationalism just as much as Neo-Platonists, as to be virtually indistinguishable at times. You're correct about things like masturbation (and other sins obviously) degrading us, but you ruin it by focusing on "rationalism". Rationalism is not holiness. If that was the case, then every degenerate pagan and philosopher has a chance to heaven without Christ's blood: Because they could be rational without any help. What they can't be is Holy. Nor is Rationalism ever listed as one of the fruits of the Spirit. Ultimately, the Apostle Paul denounced all attempts to reach or please God except one:

"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written:

'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;

the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.'

Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

Brothers and sisters, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. Therefore, as it is written: 'Let the one who boasts boast in the Lord.'" [1 Corinthians 1:18-31]

>>848211

>demonic figures like Francis of Asissi.

You're making me want to defend Catholics now. Their rationalist wankery needs to go, but Francis is not part of the problem. He expresed simple virtue and fruits of the Spirit as well as any man could.

And Orthodox should be the last ones who try to excuse themselves from this supposed "meek" outlook. They have been the best collective example of it. You should be proud of it. The early church gave it's blood. The entire Orthodox church of Greece and "Asia Minor" endured suffering with dignity for hundreds of years under the Ottomans. And Russia endured it recently from Bolsheviks.

Nietzsche is indeed right for seeing the Church as meek. We are called to be. The problem isn't his perception of this. It's that it is all he sees. And I said above, he chose poorly. He didn't see the whole picture. This world is an illusion and fallen to sin. Everything is topsy-turvy, if you will. Everything that is bad is called good, and everything good is called bad.

>>848181

2nd Post best post.

Op is trying to destroy the Faith in God of Others.

Pray for his salvation and for Lord to deliver us from the temptation of replying to trolls.

>>848215

He can't touch your Faith if it's actually based in unbreakable logic.

>>848209

>>848213

Orthos fell to communism because they rejected logic and now you're claiming we should reject logic too because it offends you. No thanks, I don't want to fall to communism and St. Thomas was a SAINT and doctor of the church no matter how much people screech "HE BAD CUZ GREEK SHEIT"

>>848173

>1. Yahweh was originally just a semitic storm-and-warrior deity, just like Zeus or Mars. We can track his evolution very easily through coins with religious imagery or the earliest Biblical literature.

Citation needed.

>2. Nietzsche completely btfo's Christianity. He points out the slave morality in the whole system and how it praises the weak, the pious, the meek, the slaves.

Nietzsche misrepresents traditional Christianity as being pacifistic and non-violent. Anybody who has read the old testament knows that it's choc full of violence in the name of God and all of it was and still is justified. Do you really think that a pacifistic religion could have conquered the war like pagans of ancient Europe? There are an untold number of warrior saints who fought and killed pagans, muslims, jews, etc. all in God's most holy name. Jesus himself used violence against the jews when they desecrated the temple. Pacifist Christianity is a relatively new phenomenon and heretical.

>3. It's just jewish mythos. I don't get how Pandora's box is less likely to exist compared to the flood or Eve's Garden.

Jews are not Israelites and the origin of an idea does not undermine its value. Not only that but there is more church lore that takes place in Europe than there is stories in the entire Bible.

>We scorned and destroyed our native faiths for semitic mythos.

Our native faiths believe in bestiality, homosexuality, and child sacrifice. The old gods deserve to be scorned.

>4. Jews could have used it to subvert whites. Christianity eventually inspired egalitarianism and other liberal ideologies.

No. Christianity oppressed jews for at least a thousand years before secularism (not Christianity) introduced ideas of equality and separation of church and state, etc. during the enlightenment which have progressed to the cesspit we see today. As soon as Christianity began to decline, so did Europe.

>>848217

>He can't touch your Faith if it's actually based in unbreakable logic.

Then what's the purpose of the Bible/Church/Christ, if logical gnosis is what it's about?

>>848220

Not OP, but could you recommend me a book on violent Christianity, i always see Christianity express as pacifism.

>>848251

The Bible tbh fam.

>>848251

Contra Faustum Manichaeum, chapter 22, if you want to see violence elaborated on defensively, under the theory of just war.

If by violent christianity, you mean that salafi jidahism give you an erection, and you want something like that, too, no.

>>848173

>So essentially there are four reasons I lost my faith:

>

>1. Yahweh was originally just a semitic storm-and-warrior deity, just like Zeus or Mars. We can track his evolution very easily through coins with religious imagery or the earliest Biblical literature.

What does this have to do with faith? You lost your "faith" in a particular brand of religion?

>2. Nietzsche completely btfo's Christianity. He points out the slave morality in the whole system and how it praises the weak, the pious, the meek, the slaves.

Pretty accurate. Designed for crowd control.

>3. It's just jewish mythos. I don't get how Pandora's box is less likely to exist compared to the flood or Eve's Garden.

Again, pretty accurate. Likely the entire Bible is a total rip off of older texts, and the Jews are most likely just con artists who completely fabricated a cool back story to go with why they keep getting persecuted for ripping off anyone within reach.

>We scorned and destroyed our native faiths for semitic mythos.

But we had fun doing it. Boom On, Eternal Boomers!

>4. Jews could have used it to subvert whites. Christianity eventually inspired egalitarianism and other liberal ideologies.

Jews and anyone with a shred of psychopathy and half a brain have used it to get and maintain power since people were dumb enough to rely on external authority.

Big question is, did you really lose your faith? or did God just strip away all the bulls— so you could learn to actually have faith, and not just brand loyalty to some cool sounding emotive ideas.

>>848173

>Jews could have used it to subvert whites.

Fact you are from /pol/ evidences suggest you are not even white. I don’t trust values into race larpers that help elect the most pro Israel president in American history.

>>848251

The founding fathers. Jefferson believed God's law is written on man's heart as the Bible says and that it could not be clouded by intellect. Therefore, if you feel like you should shoot redcoats you're right.

>>848173

Frig off bud

>>848173

No offense to you, but these points are mind viruses. We try too hard 'to be', when it should be effortless. Asking, "What should I do, to be French (or German, or Catholic) today?" Meanwhile, in parts of the world not infected by mind viruses, an Andaman Islander wakes up and doesn't ask himself "How do I be an Andaman Islander today?" and instead, he is.

These points, and the broader implied questions of "What is true heritage, what does it mean to be X, what class do I choose and how should I allocate my skill points if I want to be white?" are not the way towards discovering truth.

>>848612

Thank you. I was born Catholic but so many people here think they have a right to tell me how to be Catholic.

>>848173

The modern pagan attitude is typified in Nietzsche. For the inseparable accretions of ressentiment and philosophical thought contaminate the entirety of the Nietzschean corpus. His final fragments are blistered with unrestrained animus, dreadfully bitter and yet sustain an addictive virulence. In his own words:

>The two types: Dionysus and the Crucified. – To determine: whether the typical religious man is a form of decadence (the great innovators are one and all morbid and epileptic); but are we not here omitting one type of religious man, the pagan? Is the pagan cult not a form of thanksgiving and affirmation of life? Must its highest representative not be an apology for and deification of life? The type of a well-constituted and ecstatically overflowing spirit! The type of a spirit that takes into itself and redeems the contradictions and questionable aspects of existence! It is here that I set the Dionysus of the Greeks: the religious affirmation of life, life whole and not denied or in part; (typical – that the sexual act arouses profundity, mystery, reverence). Dionysus versus the “Crucified”: there you have the antithesis. It is not a difference in regard to their martyrdom – it is a difference in the meaning of it. Life itself, its eternal fruitfulness and recurrence, creates torment, destruction, the will to annihilation. In the other case, suffering – the “Crucified as the innocent one” – counts as an objection to this life, as a formula for its condemnation. – One will see that the problem is that of the meaning of suffering: whether a Christian meaning or tragic meaning. In the former case, it is supposed to be the path to a holy existence; in the latter case, being is counted as holy enough to justify even a monstrous amount of suffering. The tragic man affirms even the harshest suffering: he is sufficiently strong, rich and capable of deifying to do so. The Christian denies even the happiest lot on earth: he is sufficiently weak, poor, disinherited to suffer from life in whatever form he meets it. The god on the cross is a curse on life, a signpost to seek redemption from life; Dionysus cut to pieces is a promise of life: it will be eternally reborn and return again from destruction.

Friedrich Nietzsche, The Will to Power, §1052 (March-June 1888)

In Nietzsche, we find a recognition of the irreconcilable opposition between the perspective of the victimisers’ mythology and the Biblical perspective of the victims – and the consequent ramifications for all future ethics and politics. The passion and intensity of Nietzsche’s polemic betrays his ressentiment par excellence. Perhaps blunted by the silence brought by Christian society, Nietzsche considered ressentiment the primary form of the desire for violence, and both the fruit and the germ of Christianity; everything in Nietzsche is under the influence of Christianity. As the Bible relates:

>And the Lord said to him: No, it shall not be so: but whosoever shall kill Cain, shall be punished sevenfold. And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, that whosoever found him should not kill him. And Cain went out from the face of the Lord, and dwelt as a fugitive on the earth, at the east side of Eden. And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived, and brought forth Henoch: and he built a city, and called the name thereof by the name of his son Henoch. And Henoch begot Irad, and Irad begot Maviael, and Maviael begot Mathusael, and Mathusael begot Lamech: Who took two wives: the name of the one was Ada, and the name of the other Sella. And Ada brought forth Jabel: who was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of herdsmen. And his brother's name was Jubal; he was the father of them that play upon the harp and the organs. Sella also brought forth Tubalcain, who was a hammerer and artificer in every work of brass and iron. And the sister of Tubalcain was Noema.

Genesis 4:15-22

>>849850

The legacy of Cain lies in his role as both fratricide and founder. Consequent to Abel’s murder, the law against reciprocal violence is established. And where Cain builds the first city, his descendants give that city husbandry, music and technology. Modern anthropology, ignorant or unwilling of cultural interpretation, ends at observing the same elements in the story of Cain and Abel as in the mythologies of Dionysus and Romulus. All of these are statements on collective murders, and so require a name. As Jesus said:

>Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of all lies.

John 8:43-44

That name is Satan, and these myths are thus expressions of the false accusations, collective murders and victim deification that founded pre-Christian culture, and that the Gospels recognise, reproach and reject. The Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, is therefore the advocate of all martyrs as witnesses to the truth of the Gospels. The dreadful sword of Christ, l’ordre de la charité, spells the doom of all those Satantic societies by revealing their social order lies on the convergence of collective violence upon a scapegoat. And it was this inevitable destruction of Satan, by the Christian interpretation of collective violence and its universal declaration of guilt that must invariably, argued Nietzsche, prevent any continued order or fraternity between men.

Ressentiment is the element of violence that survives the impact of Christianity. For ressentiment flourishes wherever violence is diminished and Christianity has only partly succeeded in its aims to eliminate violence in all its forms.

The ressentiment, only made possible by Christianity and its diminution of Satanic violence, expressed by Jungian efforts to Biblicise mythology, by Heideggerian efforts to mythologise the Gospels, and by the idealisations of primitive cultures have only contributed to the vague and eclectic religiosity of our time. Faced with the dreadful turbulence of Christianity, both Jung and Heidegger grasped at the vestigial elements of the old sacred. Except for their vocabulary, they are wholly within the realms of nineteenth-century historicism.

>>849851

Unexposed to the priestly whetting of pagan teeth with blood, few recognise the urgency of the Gospels. Bewilderment and condescension follows each mention of the collective murder of God. Per Nietzsche:

>“…God is dead! God remains dead! And we have killed him! How shall we console ourselves, the most murderous of all murderers? The holiest and mightiest that the world has hitherto possessed, has bled to death under our knife – who will wipe the blood from us? With what water could we cleanse ourselves? What lustrums, what sacred games shall we have to devise? Is not the magnitude of this deed to great for us? Shall we not ourselves have to become Gods, merely to seem worthy of it? There never was a greater event – and on account of it, all who are born after us belong to a higher history than any history hitherto!” – Here the madman was silent and looked again at his hearers; they also were silent and looked at him surprise. At last he threw his lantern on the ground, so that it broke in pieces and was extinguished. “I come too early,” he then said, “I am not yet at the right time. This prodigious event is still on its way, and is travelling – it has not yet reached men’s ears. Lightning and thunder need time, the light of the stars needs time, even after they are done, to be seen and heard. This deed is still more distant from them than the most distant stars – and yet they have done it themselves.

Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science, §125

The expression here is contaminated across several layers, yet still logically distinguishable. At its most obvious, Nietzsche is writing on the modern disappearance of the deification consequent to the collective murder of a real victim. The second level follows, the realisation that the victims of collective murder are the pagan gods. The highest level is the realisation that the Passion of Christ is not the death of the Christian God but the death of all other gods.

>>849853

Like his fellow idealists, Nietzsche felt that the death of an exhausted religion – the Biblical religion – would allow the birth of some new god, a birth unrooted in the death of the resented Biblical God. Idealists are unable to apprehend the reality, rendered intelligible by Christianity, of collective violence, and see it only as a cure for the fermenting pandemonium – the ressentiment – of their, and our, time. The caustic trickle fills the cup of every “intellectual” nihilist, i.e., the psychologists.

As an interpretative tool, the imitative principle is far more serviceable than the Freudian complex. By eliminating the conscious patricide-incest desire, it does away with the cumbersome necessity of the subsequent repression of the desire. In fact, the imitative principle casts the unconscious aside; it explains the Oedipus myth and does so with an economy and precision lacking in the Freudian approach.

Freud’s thought constantly drifted in the direction of imitation, and was checked, each time, by his necessity for the patricide-incest motif. Lacan, too, failed to intuit the imitative nature of desire, bound by his linguistic obsession to reinforce the “structural” aspects of Freudian analysis.

The interest of Freudian analysis does not lie in its results, in its pretentious accumulation of psychic agencies; nor does it lie in the spectacle of Freudian apprentices clambering up and down the precarious scaffolding of Freudian doctrine with remarkable and futility. Rather, Freudian analysis is itself an obstacle to discerning the nature of the relationship between subject, model and object; to understanding the origins of ressentiment and violence. Yet Freud recognised, in an anti-Freudian moment, the pagan commonality of collective murder in religious rituals (See Sigmund Freud, Totem and Taboo, The Return of Totemism in Childhood).

Despite its enshrinement in the modern canon, the dramatic insights of Nietzsche have been buried under the rhetorical ornaments and milquetoast analyses necessary to avoid the dreadful guilt of collective violence. The idolatry of Freud ceases wherever his gospel turns to the same Satanic theme.

These men exemplify the heights of ressentiment; their writings plaster every theatre and brothel. They know but one thing: to fill their belly and be drunk, to be wounded whilst fighting for their favourite charioteer, to live like goats and pigs. Here the slayers of Christ gather together, here the Cross is driven out, here God is blasphemed, here the Father is ignored, the Son is outraged, here the grace of the Spirit is rejected (John Chrysostom, Adversus Iudaeos, Homily). The response to the God Question is as it was in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries: You are free to think as you will, and everything of yours shall remain yours, but from this day on, you are one apart from the many.

Few are ready for the answer of Christ:

>The stone which the builders rejected has become the cornerstone.

Psalm 118:22

The habitual reaction, in the wake of any exception to internalised ressentiment, but especially in real violence, is to retroactively apply a host of malignancies upon the vengeful; and, since every community believes every evil that befalls it comes of evil purpose, to erect prohibitions against the behaviour or action of the vengeful.

Yet modern society further prevents the mediation of the desire for violence with each new prohibition. For, possessing no equivalent response to the adolescent rite of passage or the funereal liturgy, it cannot pre-empt and resolve the desire for violence; it dissuades dissent only with the reciprocated violence of jurisprudence. Where nineteenth-century nihilism quietly seethed, modern annihilism flares, with pagan intensity, for real violence. Every modern prohibition is therefore to the exciting of further violence, and to the dissolution of the community. For as Jesus said:

>Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand. And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand?

Matthew 12:25-26

>>848173

>Yahweh was originally just a semitic storm-and-warrior deity, just like Zeus or Mars. We can track his evolution very easily through coins with religious imagery or the earliest Biblical literature.

2. Nietzsche completely btfo's Christianity. He points out the slave morality in the whole system and how it praises the weak, the pious, the meek, the slaves.

3. It's just jewish mythos. I don't get how Pandora's box is less likely to exist compared to the flood or Eve's Garden.

We scorned and destroyed our native faiths for semitic mythos.

4. Jews could have used it to subvert whites. Christianity eventually inspired egalitarianism and other liberal ideologies.

One get your zeitgeist koolaid out of here.

I respect Nietzsche more than I do some who call themselves Christians. After his examination of Christianity, he became disillusioned with Jesus' call to love our enemies. This led Nietzsche to his main criticism - that it's a passive, "slave" religion. He devoted himself and attacked it with vitriol from that point forward.

Why I respect him somewhat is that he was honest at least. He manned up about it, even if it did lead him to Hell. Why I don't respect some who call themselves Christian is that they are met with the same message of Christian love, and instead of confronting it honestly and embracing their own evil like he did, they try to contort and rationalize ways around it. They want to embrace all of the will to power that he did, but end up inventing false versions of Christianity to support it. Unlike Nietzsche, they can't be men who went their own way. They try to make Jesus their accomplice instead. This is the greater sin.

>>848173

Don't even try it. Your tricks won't work here. Go back to bunkerchan or wherever you came from.