Aquinas, Doctor of the Redpill

Sounds like you just want to harm other people, albeit now in the name of "God".

Actually I once thought like you. But I grew out of it.

May the Lord be with this thread.

I also once thought like you, but then I grew out of it as well

more like doctor of the cringe

Based and Christpilled

Attached: 97280861d18b8845429bb10a706c4069847299f35ce8e0d1d4c1ef8daae5e5af.png (499x499, 211K)

Why do "redpilled" people see only violence and martial aspects of culture as glorious? These "redpilled" people never seem to praise poetry, drama or arts. To them there seems to be only two aspects of life. Sexual and violent, conquest and having kids. Neither is inherently wrong, but its terribly primitive view of the world. There seems to be no intent to reach anything transcendent.

there's nothing transcendent

>Jews
Those are your parents you speak of, be respectful.

And still, to this day, not a single article of proof that the Christian God exists.

Beautiful art and cathedrals do not make your God real, though.

>people not catching this obvious satire

You sound like a terrible person, essentially itching for a "higher reason" to act out your lower impulses. To harm others in the name of "God", though you'd harm them the same without such a concept.

I outright reject Christ actually, and so I am not saved. To Hell I go then, simply for honoring my personal autonomy of belief.

You aren't as clever as you think. It's common for young people to feel like theyve found the perfect system and only if everyone would just accept it then the world's problems will be fixed. Growing up means you have realised that things don't work that way and you were childish to think otherwise.

They probably focus on it because violence is an important part of masculinity which is being neglected or even suppressed by popular culture. The accepted idea that all violence and bullying is evil is myopic and needs to change. Kids should be allowed to wrestle with each other and some bullying needs to take place because wrestling can teach boys how to interact with each other and bullying stymies a lot of anti-social behavior.

>babies who die will spend eternity in limbo just for being born
What a """based""" guy

There is already an overwhelming culture of bullying in the west, not only among kids. If you go places like the middle east or India, there isn't really "bullying" as we have here. That's not to say it's a utopia, but there isn't this thing where if you stand out in any way at all you get attacked and bullied mercilessly. In India people don't give a shit if you are eccentric.

Probably the OP was bullied and is now using religion to feel superior to others.

True. War against boys is real. And school stops the even most harmless wrestling between boys. But I don't know about the bullying part. Pranks and jokes are one thing. But causing any real physical or psychological damage shouldn't be tolerated.

I think there's an acceptable degree of bullying that isn't really definable. One of my very first memories of school was getting caught picking my nose by a couple girls and they made fun of me so I never did it again. They did me a favor.

Even some of the more severe stuff can be a good thing, like making fun of somebody for having to wear dirty clothes to school since that's all their parents can afford. It may be out of the kids control but it could motivate them to be a good productive adult. I was made fun of for being poor and I don't want my kids to go through that so I'm working extra hard to provide for them. There's a lot of potential consequences for the zero tolerance of bullying that I see in schools today.

He was never with you. You just imagined he was and now that ego formation is weakening.

> because violence is an important part of masculinity which is being neglected or even suppressed by popular culture.

Literally the most brainlet take I have ever seen on this website.
The vast majority of videogames, films etc are filled with the glorification of violence.

>Aquinas_checking_thy_digits
I knew you were a pretentious teenager. There is no argument because there is no argument. You're just being arrogant like most teenagers who've found their new fad.

I mean trudging through Catholicism is somewhat heroic, but categorically silly since you can simply renounce Catholicism.

Attached: mfw catholics.jpg (220x263, 19K)

Actually I did leave theism through reason. And my current views are nothing like what popular culture dictates. I came to them by my own personal reflection, certainly not by accepting dogmatic pronouncements made by faggot pedophile priests who worship a dead like on a stick.

If you would have read further than the first sentence you would see that I'm talking about particular types of violence. I doubt it's any use pointing this out to you.

>>Verifies the legitimacy of waging Just War, paving the way for the reconquesta that absolutely BTFO Muslims and Jews like
>Deus vult m'lady

Killing Jews and shitskins has nothing to do with Christianity

>bullying poor kids for being poor
user what the fuck?

Attached: b76.jpg (415x454, 18K)

You read that post and think I bullied people for being poor?

>>brings back the virtues
>>brings back glory
>>brings back honor
>brings back Aristotle and simply calls him "the Philosopher"
>quotes fucking Socrates in the same breadth as Peter
So all the goods things he did were concerned with reversing christian excesses. lol

That doesn't change my point at all. Violence as a means towards good is extremely prevalent in our media.

Typical beta male who loves christianity because it justifies his hate and wrothful nature
>hurrr deus vault 14/88

Nigga did you really need people to verbally abuse you for you to know that being poor sucks? The shitty part about being poor is being poor, not being mocked over it. That's just insult to injury. Like, when you're working really hard and making money, what percentage of your brain is going "Yeah, I'm gonna really stick it to those elementary school children! Those fucking 10 year olds are gonna know who they're messing with!"?

Yes, violence is prevalent. Do you understand that I'm talking about particular types of violence being suppressed by our culture, and not all violence? There have been huge efforts to end roughhousing and bullying among children.

>Exclaim argument for why it can be good for people to fuck their dogs
>"Fucking your pet dog? user what the fuck?"
>"Wait, you heard my argument, and think I fuck my dog? How could this have happened?"

Dude

There's all sorts of behavior that people can come to accept and be happy with but eventually choose not to because of social pressure, and being poor is one example. You assume being poor is intrinsically shitty but I don't accept that.

Catholics shit and piss all over history

>reversing christian excesses.

Catholics ones, not Christian.

I said I was bullied for being poor and I gave an reason to believe that was ultimately a good thing even though it sucked at the time. You come along and thought I was bullying other people for being poor and now you're talking about dog fucking. There is something seriously wrong with you people.

Apologies.
>Even some of the more severe stuff can be a good thing, like making fun of somebody for having to wear dirty clothes to school since that's all their parents can afford. It may be out of the kids control but it could motivate them to be a good productive adult.
user, what the fuck?

Attached: Scoob.jpg (463x364, 148K)

Yes, bullying people can be a good thing. What's the problem?

Yeah that went really well for us didn’t it

If being poor isn't intrinsically shitty, why do people deserve to be verbally abused over it? You're saying verbal abuse is a good way to get people to stop being poor, but you're also saying the only reason someone wouldn't want to be poor is the verbal abuse one receives for it.

Nobody claimed you bullied kids over being poor. I and the other guy claimed you're a dick for thinking that's okay to do. The fact that analogies baffle you as much as they seem to, along with your willingness to berate kids over things out of their control, makes me worry for your children.

>They probably focus on it because violence is an important part of masculinity which is being neglected or even suppressed by popular culture.
>The accepted idea that *all* violence [...] is evil

Being poor is not intrinsically shitty because poor people can be happy in their situation. I never said people deserved to be abused for being poor. Abuse can encourage people to choose not to be poor or take steps to alleviate their situation, and that's the good that can come from bullying poor people. I'm not calling for a campaign to shit on poor people I'm merely pointing out that some good can come from it.

If you want to communicate an idea you're going to have to actually tell me with your own words and not just leave me hints and expect me to piece it together. Are you saying that violence isn't generally considered evil even if some type of it are prevalent in our culture? I don't want to play the guessing game.

Daily reminder catholicism is babylonian idol worship

i really wish you wouldn't talk like such a faggot while discussing aquinas.

Why do these people always show up in Christian threads?

No one cares what you think.

there is lots of proof actually

No one cares what you think, christcuck.

i care, checkmate faggot

Then stop bumping Christian threads, faggot.

It has, in innumerable ways.

Why should I, christcuck?

You are a christcuck.

>Abuse can encourage people to choose not to be poor or take steps to alleviate their situation, and that's the good that can come from bullying poor people.
>Abuse can encourage people to choose not to be poor
I thought that "choosing not to be poor" thing was a meme and not a actual life advise

Attached: 1549561055661.jpg (271x186, 6K)

Read in Latin or you're a fraud. Saint Thomas is not a fucking pill.

If you're poor and don't want to live like that there's always steps that can be taken to change your circumstances. My family was poor because they chose to spend frivolously and didn't save anything. They also weren't too concerned with any sort of career advancement so they didn't work towards improving skills that would have demanded higher wages. So in that way they chose to be poor.

i am someone tho

You are nobody.

How does he prove that his faith is the correct faith? If he proved God's existence he hasn't proved Christianity is true. This it the problem every defender of their particular religion have.

Who is claiming that anything in the OP proved Christianity true? Either way Christianity is actually pretty unique among religions because it has some good reasons to believe it's true.

One of those is the resurrection argument which starts with some basic historical facts which the majority of historians of all sort agree on. Jesus Christ was a real person who actually existed, he was crucified, and multiple different people and groups claimed to have interacted with Jesus after his crucifixion.

Because Jesus was crucified, it's reasonable to believe he really died. He was placed in a guarded tomb because it was in the best interest of the Jewish and Roman authorities to make sure that the body didn't disappear, considering that the Romans were putting down a rebellion and the Jews were squashing a heresy. We know for sure the body truly disappeared because the Jews accused the Christians of stealing it.

There's only so many ways to account for these facts and explain what actually happened. We could say that the followers of Jesus were hallucinating when they experienced the risen Christ but hallucinations don't really work like that. We don't find multiple groups of people at different places and times experiencing the same hallucination. We could also say that they the early Christians were lying about experience the risen Christ in a play for power and money but this explanation fails on account of how many of those early Christians were tortured and martyred for their belief. This also wouldn't explain the radical conversion of Paul who went from a lavish lifestyle of a Christian persecutor to a devout persecuted Christian after he met Jesus on the road.

I think the best explanation which accounts for all the facts is that Jesus is who he said he was. While this is certainly a good reason to believe Christianity is true, I'll admit that it's not a proof. You're not going to find a proof of Christianity and I think that's by design. A proof is something that a reasonable person must believe is true and so if we had a proof we would be compelled to accept Jesus, but we can't truly love somebody we can't reject. If God wanted robots he would have made them.

I've been going through a hard loss of faith myself. I feel as if there is still the metaphysical, something holy that I can't fathom, a mystical oneness, a holy fire, or what have you, but the idea that it cares for me or is even conscious of me becomes more and more absurd by the day.

You cared enough to reply, bitch

Even if Jesus really did resurrect himself, it still doesn't square the rest of the issues internal to Christianity, nor does it reconcile those between Christian doctrine and the world outside it. Nor have we any knowledge of how to navigate these discrepencies, given that contact from Jesus seemingly ended a long time ago. What is Jesus even doing now, such that he previously came and lived 33 years here, and the subsequent 2000 have not heard a whisper from him?

righteousness and surrender of spirit will save you, the witness of the holy spirit comes to those who cry out to him in humility. never give up and don't get distracted by the world

I don't know what these internal issues of Christianity that you're referring are but we do have historical documents which show Jesus setting up a physical Church and giving it the authority to arbitrate and rule on doctrine in his steed, and he even goes so far as to promise to protect them from teaching error. Any discrepancies within the Church are vastly overstated and ultimately inconsequential.

Do you remember when I talked about there not being a proof of Christianity by design? That same sort of logic applies to the question of why Jesus isn't here right now, hovering in the sky and making his presence felt. If he did that we would be compelled to accept him but then true love for him couldn't exist.

How do i into meister eckhart?

what do you want, a logical proof? do you think no christian has any warrant for their beliefs?

>what do you want, a logical proof?

Sure.

>do you think no christian has any warrant for their beliefs?

I understand they are faith based and based on emotion and feelings which is okay, but that's why there's an increase in atheism: a lot of people want evidence to believe in something. If it's based on feelings and not facts then might as well be any religion.

>and multiple different people and groups claimed to have interacted with Jesus after his crucifixion.
what's the source on this?

what evidence do you have for the positive belief that there is no God? You can't think that merely the lack of evidence is warrant for such a strong belief. That's not how empiricism works.

It's recorded in the gospels. There might be other sources but I'm not familiar with them since it's not a controversial question among New Testament scholars. In terms of ancient history, 4 independent accounts of the same event is pretty strong.

I didn't say there's no God, I don't know about if he exists or not. I was saying that every religion claims their way to be the true path and there's no evidence which path is true or if any are true.

Can you truly read this post and come to the conclusion that there's NO evidence that Christianity is true?

I can see where he's coming from but the Gospels aren't historical record.

Even if the gospels were completely unreliable which is a ridiculous position, they would still count as evidence so you can't logically say there is none. You can reject the evidence, but you can't say there is none. There's literally evidence right here in this thread.

Internal issues referring both to the sectarian differences, and the recognition of literalism versus symbolism in the mythology. The external discrepencies regard the conflicts between the existing doctrine, and findings in modern science. Are you basically suggesting the RCC to be the one true church, and virtually everything they teach to be proper doctrine?

And how is it fair that Jesus appeared to so few individuals in history, while the rest of us have to rely on faulty eyewitness records of him written later from memory?

At least it's not the accelerationist discord for once.

How are only four independent accounts, themselves not even agreeing on the details, of an entirely supernatural event, in any way reliable?

Only John is independent from the others, it's academic consensus that Mark, Luke, and Matthew are textually related. There are substantial portions of identical or near-identical text shared between them, which you wouldn't expect from independent eyewitnesses.

Attached: Relationship_between_synoptic_gospels.png (952x1237, 106K)

The fact some people are stubborn in their own personal beliefs isn't a reason to think there is no true belief. I have good reasons to believe the Catholic Church is true and is protected from teaching false doctrine. As I said before, these conflicts that you're talking about are ultimately inconsequential and I have no clue what doctrine you're talking about which could even in principle be in conflict with science. It sounds like you come from a protestant background.

You talk about liberalism vs symbolism but this doesn't make any sense to me. It's a false conflict because we are not limited to saying that every story in the bible is either literal history or poetic fictions. They could instead be nonliteral accounts of actual historical events. It's a lot more complicated then you give it credit.

I really don't know why people like you bother arguing. The gospels don't agree on anything? Get real dude.

You should understand that we're talking about the people claiming to interact with Christ after he was resurrected. This is an event recorded in all 4 gospels. I don't what this is, you think because they record the same events they can't be reliable? It sounds like silliness to me.

I'm not even a Christian but I find my self defending it all the time because critics are so fucking dumb.

uh so the proof of the bible is the bible itself? I tought you mean Tacitus or something meh

No, I treat the bible as a reliable historical document which shows Jesus establishing a church and priestly hierarchy which then had the authority to declare that the bible also had God as an author.

Their differences prove their veracity. It clearly isn't a made up, concocted, and rehearsed story. The differences, rather, stem from the sheer variety of human memory. It's the same phenomenon in which multiple eyewitnesses of the same event will each recall it differently.

Isn't the second one in direct contradiction with the Bible?

He was not based. Scholasticism indirectly lead to Descartes and the Enlightenment.

How is it contradicted? The only thing I can think of Jesus commanding his apostles to leave their possessions and follow him, but that was a command for the apostles and not every Christian.

Nope, read Aquinas. His Summa is literally in the style of an FAQ, and he answers this exact question in Article 6: "Whether man ought to ask God for temporal things when he prays?"
newadvent.org/summa/3083.htm#article6

That's why Aquinas is so based. Our culture has developed various memes around Christianity that are theologically baseless, you can see the memes that I'll reply to below:

Jews aren't the Christian's parents, as Christ says to the Pharisees: "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him."

>believes religions can be falsified empirically and aren't an anagogical supra-literal, supra-scientific poetic/philosophical way of life
>believing Christianity has ever been against Just War

I'm a fan of Catholic aesthetics and so many of their thinkers - as well as the organizational aspects that seem to help to keep more traditional values in certain communities and given the choice, I might've chosen to get raised that way instead of in a more Protestant household, but I can't get over the whole Saint thing. How do you Catholics not get that this is essentially making idols/false gods?

To make something an idol is to treat it as God, as if God is that material thing. That's not what Catholics do or think. Giving respect to people in heaven is not to confuse those people with God.

But Catholics pray to Saints, no? Wear their pendents or symbols, discuss which Saint is for what (Christopher for safety in travel, Francis for animals (iirc), so much involving Mary, etc.) and so on. Isn't that essentially propping them up to the same level as God?

Haha what a faggot

You both worship a Canaanite storm deity , just you christcucks decided that the Canaanite storm god became a kike then killed himself by having himself nailed to a stick, to make up for his being really angry or some bullshit

I'm Orthodox, so my perspective on Saints may be different but: you never pray to Saints, you ask for their intercession, in a similar way in which you ask friends/family to pray for you.

To pray is to ask. We ask saints to pray for us the same way we might ask anyone else. Wearing a locket with a picture of your mom inside isn't you making your mom God.

>you ask for their intercession, in a similar way in which you ask friends/family to pray for you.
>We ask saints to pray for us the same way we might ask anyone else.

That makes more sense, I thnk. It still feels weird to me, but maybe it's just because I didn't grow up with it. I suppose I just always took the stance that you can't really pray to those in Heaven. They're out of reach, in a sense. I don't really have a backing for this, but that's what I've always believed. And in any case, your prayers are still directed at God, no?

Doesn't the Bible say not to worry about earthly things like food or clothing because as God takes care of animals he will take care even more of humans?
I looked it up it's Matthew 6:25 to 34

I care, checkmate faggot

yeah, I’m a Christian, you got a problem with that? I used to be a sinner like you but 2 years ago I found GOD. In my teens I would laugh at creationists; I would always tell my grandma that I didn’t want to go to mass; I was agnostic but not like r/Atheism. But when I GREW UP and became a man, I realised I needed to put childish things away (1 Corinthians 13:11). Why is that? Because I realized that we need Christianity to SAVE THE WEST. After I voted Trump in the 2016 election I decided to go to church again. I knew that I would find a QT pure Christian GF who I could lose my virginity to (I haven’t lost it yet because I’m saving myself for marriage, like God intended). I haven’t found her yet, but like Job I will pray and have faith in God. Then I saw Jordan Peterson talking about Christianity and I was hooked! (I don’t like him anymore though, he’s a fake Christian). I watched all his videos on the bible and realised how God reveals himself in many ways. I was on /pol/ (came from r/The_Donald during the election but I hate redditors now) Christian General and I saw Yea Forums chart which had The Bible and I KNEW I found my people. Every day I see THE WEST falling because we gave up our FAITH. Well, the new Christian intellectuals are coming; We are the sons of the Crusaders and we shall not recoil before the sons of Voltaire! (Candide was shit, so is Nietzsche (haven’t read either of them)). Yea Forums introduced me to Kierkegaard and I became a KNIGHT OF FAITH, so now I know that I just gotta believe and that’s TRUE bravery. I read DANTE and DOSTOEVSKY and I saw the beauty of God and true art. I’m a proud Catholic (Protestants are heretics) but I hate Pope Francis, he’s a heretic and isn’t MY Pope. Yea Forums is a Christian board, and I know that if I just keep recommending the Bible, telling people to go to church, and making threads about how great God is, I will finally be able to sincerely believe in God and distract myself from the gnawing feeling that I’m a fraud. Faith ain’t easy.

Attached: 1503026374848.png (232x266, 4K)

i thought the fedora atheist meme was dead but reading through this thread i suppose i was mistaken

It only happens when American time. And I don't blame them that much their view of Christianity has been destroyed by retarded protestants, and non stop media brainwasheing.
I just wish they where more self aware of how ridiculous they look.

Yea Forums isn't very different from reddit when it comes to resident fedora athiests. It wouldn't be that bad if they at least had a slight idea of what they're even talking about

Sad and blue pilled

Nice argument kiddo

Attached: meister-eckhart-quote-time-is-what-keeps-the-light-from.jpg (800x420, 66K)

Don't, he's a heretic.

>Being a non Christian is rediculous

Imagine being this retarded

>Reading comprehension

why lie user? youre not gonna get any good boy points, especially not on this board