What can I read that will convince me Christianity isn't a weak religion espousing slave morality and is thus...

stop being a christfag and be pagan

Attached: Poseidon-greek-god (1).jpg (927x933, 37K)

Paganism is outdated and it served its purpose.

Religions don't last forever. I think of it as weak mainly because even Christians can hardly be bothered to defend its traditions anymore. When the adherents of a faith no longer care, that faith's days are numbered.

Christianity is already essentially dead in many parts of Europe and North America. Places where it once had 95-99% of the population.

I would say paganism is timeless

>Christianity is dead! Places where it used to be the norm don't even care about it anymore!

>paganism is timeless

How can you say both?? This thread is nonsense. And I'm not a christ fag, I plain could give 0 shits if some heeb got nailed to 2x4s. I also equally couldn't careless if retards back in the day believed a /fit/fag with a hammer was responsible for lightning existing

Jordan Peterson

Egoism

I second penises.

maybe you dont get religion, the fact people still practice paganism thousands of years later shows its timeless

>Religions dont last forever.
Judaism is oldest modern religion, Buddhism second, to my knowledge. And quite recently Odinism and Olympianism are attempting comebacks.

Religions may not last forever, but they last long enough to matter to the present living generation.

>Defend its traditions
Traditions have a habit of mellowing out with elements being cast off for being obsolete, eg pipe organs, services in 100% latin (gutenberg forced their hand), and cathedrals in the shape of crosses (bad acoustics).

What traditions do you mean, specifically?

>Essentially dead
The verdict is still out. Crf: the existence of TBN and all the mega churches (mostly charismatic no frills), JP rallies in Germany.

Hinduism and any indoeuropean religion is far older than Judaism

I mean basic traditions like actually attending Church services more than once a year, valuing family life, not getting divorced, etc.

This is the sort of recommendation I was looking for. Thanks user

The struggle against the existing order and overthrowing the old reign of Gods is a common theme since the Greek mythology and cosmogony. The Titans were replaced by the Olympians. Uranus was castrated by Cronus.

Since God, or the biblical, monotheistic God to be precise, created Man in his own image: he also sowed the first seeds of his Ruin.

>Ashes! Ashes!... We all fall down! In ruins lies the Jehovah's Crown!

What is this tribal deity in face of modernity? He is a senile, impotent old man, rendered useless, like a rusty sword (or a club) brought into a fight against firearms.

On this very existence (as an offended and vengeful tribal deity) the whole theory of Atonement depends. Why accept Christ as his Son, but not destroy his whole offspring and legacy?

Men of Earth! Seek out the heirs of the builders of the Great Tower of Babel that is Science; let them order you into a phalanx, let them build you into a pyramid or a tower; that may pierce that appointed Time which awaits you, to establish a new dynasty of new Olympians to be the mainstay and mainspring of the Earth, the pioneers of their own path to heaven and to overthrow the Abrahamic tribal menace.

Attached: Jehovah.jpg (421x425, 35K)

Attached: 41dbYLfi+6L._SX315_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (317x499, 22K)

Paganism is literally the capeshit of religions.

>implying polytheism is ever coming back as major religion

Nowhere in the post does is that even implied. It mentions Science.

>Judaism is oldest modern religion,
Hinduism and Zoroastrianism say hi.

Augustine or Chesterton maybe I don't really understand what you mean by week religion.

Hindu synthesis was 500bce ish; Jude dates to 800-400bce (best current guess, dating the Mosaic books)

Unless you count the Vedic period, when the individual area traditions havent meshed into a recognizable Hinduism yet, then no, not older.

Zoroastranism claims to have roots beyond 3k years; actual provable mentions from recorded history dates to 500bce ish as well.

Granted, good contenders.

Yes yes, substitute those traditions by all means

My original point, that religions exist for a really long time, stands.

amazon.co.uk/Resistance-Evil-Force-Ivan-Ilyin/dp/1726472043

of course you would count Vedic

I like that book.

Those are good things, but not central to the faith.

Their abandonment reflects the pressure from the changes of our times, is all.

Most based atheist answer

Me too.

Attached: 1555880540338.png (684x940, 32K)

Meaning i worship/pursue my own desire?

Just to be clear before i attempt it.

Dif user
Essentially slave to a false notion of self, or to a word (ego) that blinds an ever morphing 'entity' as to the impossibility of its eternalization: one hour the false afflatus: I am so great; the next hour tearfully hugging a beaten horse until detatched and dragged home by civil authorities to be placed under the guardianship of one's just as whack ueberMaedchen Schwester; the next hour writing silly letters to one's former friends and colleagues; the hour after that: dead.
Ficking pitiful.

Attached: marlene-dietrich-2-265x300.jpg (265x300, 14K)

Define slave morality.

It's a false distinction.

Read the fucking news--
Yellow vested slaves are angwee that over a billion dollars have been donated to rehabilitate a Christian monument.
Governments take money; a thoroughly taxed population blithely throws money at Christ. The religion of slaves? Please..

I like you unironically.

My problem: i privately deem every other nonsubscriber to the essentials of my worldview has having "false notions of self".

It's a valid argument; just so easy to abuse as a dodge/pillory i can't readily trust people using it.

The Phenomenology of Spirit, Plato's Parmenides. I rebuke Pascal, he's basically the Yea Forums spermposter, in fact I'm almost sure he's the one recommending him.

Okay, at least I know where youre coming from, if approximately.
For me I'd rather speak in silence to somewhat other than myself as opposed to for instance 'meditate'. When ideas do come they come as inspiration thereby making it possible for me to be grateful, which I believe is humility not in its 'truest' but in its only form. If I could I'd go back to church but I can't so my practical position's not so far removed from yours (if I haven't read too far awry).
Happy Easter. It's my favorite holiday but all I did was a light a few candles.

>morality

I remember hearing from a monk discuss this and his response was that it's not weakness, but achieving holiness is the goal, to get closer to the qualities of God. He went on to talk about theosis or deification.

Timelessness doesn't imply it's true.

He can't even admit that he believes in all of that.

G. K. Chesterton, probably

Have you tried not playing D&D?

Morality concerns human behavior, a slave is one who is not only subject to a higher power, but viewed as a chattel or moveable possession by the society wherein both master and slave subsist. From this it can be assumed that 'slave morality' is either a 'type' of morality suitable for slaves or that slaves would adopt for themselves given the requisite power to be able to do so. Essentially however it is yet a further instance of Nietzsche coming up with an insult disguised as a term that he bets will take given his own favorite mode of aesthetic justification, i.e. many appeals to his readers' olfactory senses, e.g. Christianity smells bad, reeks, etc. At some point Yea Forums should deign to read Overbeck (Nietzsche's best friend and confidante who was himself a Christian).

though the components are not christian in origin it can be made to work with a certain conception of christianity

Attached: 718UnJoYQ8L.jpg (1400x2169, 231K)

Christianity a 'weak' religion, I can see why someone might view it as such. I mean, if a Christian is slapped in the face, the Christian thing to do would be to turn the other cheek. I've heard of historical value in this action that isn't present today; supposedly to back-hand someone is the typical way of striking a slave, but if they are struck with an open palm then that is how one would slap someone who is more on an equal level. Thus, if a Christian turns the other cheek, it is not just an act of strength and defiance but also puts the Christian in a position to be seen as more than just a slave, an underling.

This context is not present today, but all the same, to take abuse and persevere, I consider that to be strong. I also consider it strength to refrain from violence unless it is the only possible solution. Also, Jesus Christ had faced his execution bravely. There was a moment of questioning while on the cross, to my understanding, but still he accepted the gruesome crucifixion and even prayed to His father to forgive those who so mistreated Him. That seems like incredible strength to me, and has inspired many people, myself included.

Christianity requires truth, in fact if you denounce God to save your life, turning your back on Him, then He'll turn His back on you as well. Not so, in Islam. To lie to save your life is takiyya, and to my understanding it's considered righteous to lie to save one's own life, but I consider lying to be cowardly. To lie is to be unwilling to face reality, and to lie in denouncing the faith that you hold dear, even in the face of possible death, it is still weak and cowardly to me. So, speak truth, face the world forthrightly, and don't let lies leave your lips. That in and of itself requires strength and bravery.

I suppose it's worth noting that in the Old Testament there's situations where self-defence with lethal force is permitted, but I think Christ would be against that unfortunately. Just as Christ did away with all that stuff in Leviticus that gave reasons to put people to death. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." We are all sinners.

>being enslaved to the words of some random nobody who tells you to listen to him
Yikes.

>Jesus Christ faced his execution bravely
With respect to this assertion I feel are other notions that once applied but perhaps now no longer do. For instance, the notion of what it is a follower must do (in order to even be a follower) the answer was TAKE UP ONE'S CROSS AND FOLLOW ME. In former times this led to an influx of the desire to become a martyr to one's religion- not through terror or the adsciticious murders of others along with one's holier and therefore more prepared self- but for the sake of devotion to the injunction of one's God alone, and only involving the sacrifice of oneself or one's own life (essentially through a refusal to lie). This too no longer applies to relatively wealthy Westerners, who now live more devotedly with respect to their possessions and even their increase. The text of fitting a camel through the eye of a needle comes to mind here.
There are of course other instances of what once applied but now no longer does or seems to....
At any rate I feel a great point was made in your text, user.

Well Christians seek the be slaves to God so it not wrong but beeing a slave to God frees them form beeing a slave to society.

It can be argued that the moment on the cross was actually a quotation of Psalm 22, fulfilling prophecy and teaching simultaneously.

The bulk of the texts and beliefs found in modern Judaism were written and codified during the Babylonian captivity making it more like 600 to 500 bc rather than the 800 bc date you describe. From what I understand there was little separating the jews from their surrounding neighbors in terms of religious belief before that.

Absolutely. And so the yoke is loose 'and the burden's light'.

READ RESSENTMENT. RESSENTMENT BY SCHELER. REEESENTMENT REEEEEE

Attached: 1369547A-3343-4237-B2CA-DD9556580B35.jpg (410x304, 24K)

Christianity is the based way to be an atheist.

Unfortunately, I think the Muslim population in the West will be on the rise, and as such more Christians will get killed for their faith. Like in Sri Lanka on Sunday when over 200 were killed. Crime and conflict will rise, and I do believe that situations will come about where groups of Muslims get a hold of a Christian somewhere secluded and thus can tell him to convert to Islam or die. So I think it's still important to be willing to put your life on the line to keep Christ in your heart. Anyhow, thanks for the compliment, and hopefully I'm proven wrong. I do anticipate a wave of centrist/right-wing political victories across the West through 2019 and also in 2020, which hopefully will help deal with the migrant crisis that the radical leftists have forced upon us. Thanks for the compliment.

Some Christians believe that the creation of the nation of Israel is a fulfillment of some sort of religious prophecy. I don't know about all that, but I'm reading the New Testament and it seems pretty clear that Jews and Gentiles (myself obviously being a Gentile; a non-Jew) can get along, particularly with Christians. After all, the values at the foundation of the West, the greatest civilization in the history of mankind, are Judeo-Christian. Jewish and Christian. Even the disgusting Quran tells Muslims "do not take Jews or Christians as allies for they are allies of one another." Something like that, and as far as I'm concerned, fuckin' eh. Stay in their Islamic shitholes, and if they try to invade the West, time for another Crusade. Interestingly though they seem to be invading by 'peaceful' means, though they don't seem to stay peaceful when they get here, not all of them anyways.

I support Israel primarily because my Jewish allies have been persecuted quite enough in the past, but also because an allied nation in the middle of the Islamic Middle East is quite strategically helpful. Also, I MUCH prefer the holy lands of Israel and Jerusalem and what not to be in Jewish hands rather than Muslim hands. Hell, the Jews are probably more loving of their faith and history even more than the typical Christian, and Judaism is older than either Christianity or Islam by a span of centuries, so Hell yeah, let them have Israel. If the Muslim hordes attempt to invade, I hope my fellow Christians will desire going to their defence. After all, with every additional dead Muslim extremist, the world becomes a safer, more peaceful, and more prosperous place. So let 'em try... and we'll cut 'em. Christ wouldn't want it, but as it turns out, I am nowhere near as peaceful as Him and I have some degree of hatred in my heart. I'm certain it saddens Him, but well, this is who I am. Perhaps I will become better in time as I learn. Whatever 'better' may turn out to be.

Read some different works by Saints.

¨The good man, though a slave, is free; the wicked, though he reigns, is a slave.¨

The Present Age
Sickness Unto Death
Demons

based pascalposter

Paganism is a christian insult.

City of God might do the job, Augustine often engages in takedowns of these so called master moralities (to varying degrees of success)

>revealed religions
>traditions
LOL

Is there anything I should read beforehand?

>religions
Are you pagan or what?

>christianity
>based

Palestine belongs to the people who lived there for centuries, not to kikes.

could you have written a more brainlet response to that paragraph.

somehow i doubt it

Evangelitards like you are the scourge of this planet.

best post I've seen in ages. I always thought it was obvious how loving your enemy was the most noble act a man could possibly make, yet others find it too hard to understand

It goes against the laws of nature. Prey animals that “love” their predators go extinct.

History

It gets you enslaved by vice.

Paganism is a way of thinking, not a doctrine.

Naw.

So are you ready for the number? You have to call it

May as well be Facebook here.

Nothing.

Attached: paganism and jq.jpg (905x787, 238K)

Attached: 1555631337329.png (800x600, 735K)

>we hate christ
>but we also want you to become christian
what dickhead made this picture

What we would recognise as modern Judaism (the Pentateuch as well as the Septuagint) was invented in Alexandria c. 270 B.C., copied in large part from sources found in the Library.
This is now accepted Biblical history, as related by Gmirkin in his book.

Attached: Gmirkin-144x144.jpg (144x144, 3K)

I never claimed to be an Evangelist, nor do I identify as one.

Thank you very much for the compliment, and it is indeed very difficult to seek a path of non-violence. I have a room mate who's an aggressive atheist and essentially a nihilistic hedonist. He lies at seemingly any given opportunity whether or not there's anything to gain, he's cowardly, he's also almost 60 years old and something like five and a half feet tall. Perhaps 168cm or so. He's thin, smoked his whole life, does drugs when he can afford him... meanwhile I'm tall, broad, strong, still in my 20s, a non-smoker in terms of tobacco, and I've attempted joining the Military before with such intent that I had a work-out phase in my life roughly 2 years long. I could rip him to PIECES with my BARE hands and I've even DREAMED about it. I have DREAMED about murdering this man, and y'know what? I wouldn't even try to get away with it. I'd beat him down, either choke him sufficiently long enough or just stomp on his throat, then grab the house phone and call the Police myself. Surrender to them, request no lawyer, plead guilty, and let them send me to whatever prison they want.

Even though that path would ruin my life... I see it as the easier one. I am even capable of seeing it as the MORAL path, I would be martyring myself to prison to spare the world his toxicity. If I operated purely on logic, that is where it takes me... but thankfully I have faith, and that teaches me that it's not the way. My future is too bright to throw away. It takes strength to put up with him, day after day for over 2 years now. It's miserable, and I still adore the thought of taking that pathetic little cowardly creature (and I do NOT call a man 'coward' lightly) and beating him until my fists are numb and his face is unrecognizable. Still, God stays my hand, and I am grateful, for time will take him soon enough. For a good year and a half or so now I've known that he has less than a decade left to live, so now it's down to about 8.5 years at most. He will not see 2030, I am confident of this... and I will outlast him.

>tell me how I can learn about this religion
>don't recommend me its primary text though

Attached: 1510277605196.png (403x448, 53K)

Nah

Take 2:
So *this* is the basis of your egoism: essentially distrust and detachment due to a want of confidence in whomever your interlocutor happens to be *at the moment*. In a way, that's fair. But your insistence upon 'worldview' as opposed to 'self' made me pause. Does one sincerely identify oneself with one's worldview? Granted they both move, just as today's self isn't necessarily tomorrow's self, nor today's view necessarily tomorrow's, STILL, when one pauses at whatever time to offer some other person news of the day's reportage that other (more than likely) is either going to contradict one's words or 'worldview'(and probably stupidly) or start to ask irrelevant questions.. or even attempt to change the subject entirely. Where refuge? The self or ego. What the verdict? Their false notion(s). 'Egoism,' thus, or the explicit (if secret) refusal to suffer any contradiction whatsoever. I think I get it.
Perhaps for an aesthetic reason or two I do not like to view myself as an egoist- but am I? Maybe, but I really don't like the idea. Though I'm aware of what I do I've never considered myself as having a worldview unless of course 'worldview' is your word for general opinions and preferences. I do have some of those but I don't push them.

Attached: Marechal_Ney_à_Waterloo.jpg (640x426, 108K)

Nietzsche

THIS
If you don't mind it basically being paganism under a christian veil. Kind of funny that Charlemagne, who wiped out the west germanic pagans, later got turned into a sort of faustian god for the grail cycle.

>paganism under a Christian veil
or the reverse, is Catholicism, user. Though some of the components have been superannuated, of course..

>tfw faith is gone
Feels bad bros

i don't get it, christianity seems like master morality to me via no fear of death via eternal life

>literally needs to be afraid of God not to murder his roommate

Well? That is 'the beginning of wisdom,' after all. I'd say he's wise not to--

Rene girard. things hidden since the foundation of the world

Attached: iu.jpg (300x420, 33K)

Christianity is slave morality but not in the sense most people think. The crux is that Jesus claims total and exclusive access to the Divine or God. Any other spiritual or religious experience outside of Christ was either committed through the grace of Christ or it was a falsehood. You are a slave not in the sense that you must be made a fool for the Divine, but that one man owns the Divine for you, especially if you follow an apostolic Church where still today humans barr others from receiving God and have legal systems that determine who has special privilege and power to perform rites and spiritual rituals. Abrahamic religions are not just different schools within a single system, they all individually believe they are the one true holder of truth and all others are heretical or at the very least schismed.

Yes

Easy.
I worship my self because I worship the Fall of man

Hello, I to have come to your same conclusions. I have came to fear God as those who feared him before. Like a zeus in the sky. I have become Catholic, and accepted the one universal Sovereign God. The One the hebrews fear and continue to fear.

They feared him before as A Zeus, and now they Fear him as a Man.

I think it also needs saying that this fellow confessed both his wrath and his vanity. Christianity thoroughly recognizes the persistence of the Hell within- call it temptation, call it what you will- but one's not evaluated with respect to this, one's evaluated with respect to one's actions, and with respect to the words that come out of one's mouth. Does 'slave morality' perhaps in at least one of its aspects overstate to the point of distortion self-control?

>weak
kek , no, is religion for strong willed men. Not pseudo internet warriors.

the eternal war against evil. the 40 years in the desert, the tons of battles of the old testament, the temptations of christ, Jesus going against the merchants in the temple, just to name a few...

>the fact people still practice paganism
Do they really? Neonazis use the Reich flag but I know that they don't care about the political ideology. It's more of a 'hardcore' sign for violent juveniles.

> slave morality
> he fell for the Nietzsche meme

Birth of Tragedy, Friedrich Nietzsche
>The passing moment, wit, levity, and caprice, are its highest deities; the fifth class, that of the slaves, now attains to power, at least in sentiment: and if we can still speak at all of "Greek cheerfulness," it is the cheerfulness of the slave who has nothing of consequence to answer for, nothing great to strive for, and cannot value anything of the past or future higher than the present. It was this semblance of "Greek cheerfulness" which so revolted the deep-minded and formidable natures of the first four centuries of Christianity: this womanish flight from earnestness and terror, this cowardly contentedness with easy pleasure, was not only contemptible to them, but seemed to be a specifically anti-Christian sentiment.

Max Scheler
René Girard
Kazimierz Dąbrowski

>still going for the christian pill
Why? It is so utterly boring, uninspiring and retarded. Their followers are annoying. They propagate anti intellectualism instead of thinking. They want ot be divine slaves of some metaphysical jew. Why?

Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis
currently reading through it right now and its got some pretty cool ideas!! he does in a very sophisticated and charming way that I didn't think would appeal to me. My friend gifted it to me and I can tell you its worth the read so far

Attached: 9780060652920.jpg (285x430, 17K)

I typically describe the reason why I am not in prison and he is not in the ground as being 'because of my faith.' Now I'd like a more concrete description... is it 'fear of God'? Well I feel as though in some sense, God and 'the Universe' is synonymous to some degree. The concept of 'wrath of God' can be viewed as the Universe motioning in one of countless ways, or even a few different ways of the countless number, to punish. Or, in other cases, to test. So, why is it that whenever I imagine murdering him, I never even bother to try and get away with it?

Well, I simply don't think that I can. I believe that I would inevitably suffer for the action, just like in Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment. But the thing is, technology is very advanced and so on that basis as well I don't think I'd succeed in getting away with it, let alone my own conscience. Besides, why throw my life away on him? I sincerely doubt that he has even 9 years left to live what with his destructive and stressful lifestyle.

Fear of God... oddly enough, I don't see much fear in it. After all, I call the Police myself in this scenario and completely accept the outcome of prison. I've even been locked up before for about a month and a half so it's not like I don't know what it's like. I'm also a lot more physically capable than I was back then and I would absolutely get back into working out. Still, I feel it certain that if I did go through with the deed of murder that there WILL be repercussions and my bright future would be quashed or at the very least, put back decades. Meanwhile right now I'm actively working towards a relationship with an absolute beauty and that would be destroyed as well, in all likelihood.

So, is this fear of God? Even though there doesn't seem to be fear in it, I suspect that it may be so. I believe that God/the Universe would draw back and absolutely pummel me to the ground with a singular devastating hay-maker. Even if I attempted to get away with it and legally did, it would hang over me that I had taken a man's life, even if it was an evil man. I would fear that people would suspect, and judge me on it. I may even end up not able to watch movie scenes involving physical violence because it brings me back to the day I had so egregiously sinned. The day that would be trapped in my mind for decades.

Cool.

I did not know that.

Thank you.

Thank you for your time.

I find the basic premise of most worldviews inform the self enough that i get little practical benefit from trying to separate them. Your beliefs inform your actions; so your concept of Self i might as well take to be the sum of your most important beliefs.

Paganism is gay and irrelevant

Bald statements are goy and from the Levant.

Or you could just get a new roommate.

I was in a homeless shelter and they managed to get me in a room to rent in a boarding house on welfare. I've since transitioned to EI one I became a student. If I could afford it, believe me, I'd move out. The landlord won't do anything.

It does.

> “Thus, a good man, though a slave, is free; but a wicked man, though a king, is a slave. For he serves, not one man alone, but what is worse, as many masters as he has vices.”

― Augustine of Hippo, City of God

Attached: 6819578.jpg (457x709, 123K)

>the king is a slave to his many masters
August the Hippo was such a pea brain

Attached: 60F96708-5C79-4FE7-B40D-87F412034A3F.jpg (600x390, 67K)

puppet to sins detected

Interesting how these tropes are replicated across time though. Augustine was a very old writer and you see the same mentality about the leaders of today: I.e. the president is a public official who serves the public.

The masses want most earnestly the leading officials to serve their interests, at least partially. The difference between now and those days is that kings actually had the power to do so, and if they did it was thought idyllic. Now it seems the system forces them to do so, meaning any autonomous actions done by the executive mean little :3

>J*deo-chritian values
you are unironically everything wrong in this shitty world.
kill your self you filthy Christ-killer.
Palestine belongs to christian Palestinians not some smelly kikes.

Why don't you share your perception of 'everything wrong in this shitty world'?

Who made the word Judeo Christian values popular, it's such an oxymoron

The Torah is literally the Old Testament in Christianity.

LUKE 22,35
Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?”

“Nothing,” they answered.

He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one!

Attached: The-kingdom-of-God-or-the-kingdom-of-heaven-is-the-main-theme-of-Jesus.-He-teaches-far-more-about-it (450x348, 61K)

maybe anything about the Crusades? Early Church? The Rule of St. Benedict?

Do you read?

That wd be the TANAKH. The Torah's the first 5 bks of the OT (and the TANAKH as well). Books are arranged a little differently however, for instance 2nd Chronicles concludes the Hebrew arrangement.

So Christianity stopped being good centuries ago?

what were the swords for?

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

Lift up your heads, O ye gates; and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in.

Who is this King of glory? The Lord strong and mighty, the Lord mighty in battle.

Lift up your heads, O ye gates; even lift them up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in.

Who is this King of glory? The Lord of hosts, he is the King of glory.

>please recommend me a book that answers my question except this specific book that does answer my question because I don’t want to read it.

All religions are literary.

It’s the dogma of the age. Evolutionary psychology is arguably one of the worst diseases that has plagued men’s minds. It destroys everything it touches. The irony is that it’s adherents are too blind and stupid to see how weak and slave-like they are for following it.

t. Devil

Attached: 3AE9C926-85B6-46B9-A577-38B44ADF0489.jpg (550x894, 16K)

G.K. Chesterton's Othodoxy. If you come out the other end convinced Christianity isn't strong and manly, you weren't paying attention

>the quran says jews christians bad and kill them.
Fuck off. I’m an ex-muslim and these claims are so laughably stupid its insane. Jews and christians are people of the book and are considered to have had divine revelations given to them in the past, but have corrupted it. Also, to the other guy your replying to, lying to save your life is not taqqiya (not that you know what taqqiya means), but it is permissible, though discouraged, and God won’t send you to Hell for lying to protect yourself and your family.
>but quran verse say kill the bads if u found them
Yes maybe because every single pagan in Makkah was out for Muhammad and his people’s heads at the time and self-defense was necessary unless muslims wanted to be wiped out? Funny how christians can have two dozen different interpretations of a single verse but somehow the Quran can only be taken at face value. Also, fuck your jewish friends and fuck israel, cunt.

and the funny thing is that the father of genetics was an agustinian abbot.

I didn't know that stuff. I've researched a fair bit about Islam and their Quran, now of course in having began reading the New Testament from the beginning rather than bouncing from book to book rather arbitrarily, I'm diving into Christianity properly to see what it's truly all about. Judaism and Buddhism are two that I'm still fairly ignorant on though that will change in time. I've listened to the fascinating discussions that Christian Dr. Jordan Peterson and Orthodox Jew Ben Shapiro had on atheist homosexual Jew Dave Rubin's internet show. That was an interesting look into the Jewish faith, but the obvious connection between the Christian Old Testament and the Jewish Torah (I don't know about the other books of the Tanakh) provides a pretty clear connection. It was from Judaism that Christianity was sprouted, after all, to my knowledge Jesus Christ and all his apostles were Israelites. So Christianity came from the Jewish peoples, and at least some of the Jewish books, and primarily IN Jewish lands.

To question Judeo-Christian values in a matter that questions the connection between Judaism and Christianity... it seems rather silly and I suspect a measure of hatred is involved in the will to separate Christianity and Judaism.

Berdyaev
The Destiny of Man
Slavery and Man
The Divine and the Human

There's the idea that Judaism came to be in the 300s AD, or rather that it's a Christian heresy, since they denied God.

>the quran says jews christians bad and kill them.
I didn't say that, but here's a Quranic passage.

5:51
O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you - then indeed, he is [one] of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people.

>but quran verse say kill the bads if u found them
I don't think I had mentioned either killing or that specific passage, but yes that passage exists.

2:191
And kill them wherever you find them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah [Persecution] is worse than killing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al- Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.

I don't care what the excuse is. The Quran is filled with calls to violence, to fight in the name of Allah, and it also says that if any Muslim who is asked to fight in the name of Allah, refuses, then they will be "punished with a painful punishment." For REFUSING to fight. Islam is a thoroughly violent religion and unacceptable in the superior Christian West.

9:38
O you who have believed, what is [the matter] with you that, when you are told to go forth in the cause of Allah, you adhere heavily to the earth? Are you satisfied with the life of this world rather than the Hereafter? But what is the enjoyment of worldly life compared to the Hereafter except a [very] little.
9:39
If you do not go forth, He will punish you with a painful punishment and will replace you with another people, and you will not harm Him at all. And Allah is over all things competent.

The Old Testament was written hundreds of years before Christ. The New Testament is said to have been properly compiled around the 300s, to my understanding. Wouldn't make sense for the Old Testament to come AFTER the New Testament, after all, the New Testament quotes the Old Testament regularly.

Like, really intense theology. Porette, Kierlegaard. It may still be slave morality but ehhh there's more to it

mospat.ru/en/documents/social-concepts/

You'll need to translate this page:
pagez.ru/philaret/about048_4.php

Attached: blessing5.jpg (1024x683, 100K)

That's not what he's saying. His point is that because the NT follows so perfectly on from the OT, while Judaism rejects a lot of fulfilment of OT prophesies, it makes more sense to say BC era Judaism was simply pre-Christ Christianity and Judaism is the younger religion which broke off with the rejection of Jesus as the Messiah.

Recommended reading:

Attached: d8fb4bad6175dfc9100d6c6829a816a4c5c85d6b.jpg (266x400, 16K)

>actually, being the most powerful person in a country is literally worse than being a slave
Good prole, don't try to improve your situation! Remember, eye of a needle! You'll get rewarded in the next life, it's a long-term investment :^)

I'm a bit confused. Okay, let's go point by point. Yes the New Testament follows the Old Testament and there's several references within the NT of the OT. This means there's lots of connections between them. As for BC Judaism being like pre-Christ Christianity, yeah pretty much, because the New Testament is what brought Christianity about but the OT elements were still in existence before Christ so viewing pre-BC Judaism as pre-BC Christianity seems accurate. Now as you say, Judaism evidently rejects the NT as being the answer to the prophetic things mentioned in the Old Testament... but how does this rejection make Judaism technically a newer religion than Christianity? AD-era Judaism and BC-era Judaism are to my understanding one constant stand and when Christ came about then Christianity branched off from it. In essence, the Old Testament is the first installment of the trilogy, Christianity is the first sequel but the Jews reject it (any Jews that accept it would convert to Christianity and join the sequel), then as far as I'm concerned the same director (God) made those two instalments and some bullshit B-movie company Muhammad-Allah Productions made some kind of bastardized final instalment that both the Jews and the Christians reject, otherwise they would convert, which by-and-large they don't. Christianity is still the dominant religion on the planet to my understanding.

To suggest that the BC-era Jews were actually Christians and that those Jews who didn't convert to Christianity basically became their own separate religion from the BC-era Judaism... that just doesn't sound correct. In fact it sounds rather silly to me. Like, Judaism pre- and post- Christ are different with Pre-Christ Jews being Christian and Post-Christ Jews being... like... DIFFERENT Jews? I don't get it.

>Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, and Bezos are my heroes
Good prole, always try to make more mammons! Remember, seize the day! You'll get rewarded with a Florida retirement on your 401K with no children before you pass into oblivion ;^)

Augustine was the best rhetorician of Rome ...

I'm the first user responded to, not the one at the other end of your message here.
The other user isn't entirely wrong, however- Judaism in its current form (Rabbinic Judaism and all its offshoots) is actually younger as a practice than either RC or EO or any of the smaller sects in for instance Ethiopia, Egypt, Syria, etc. Weirdly, liturgical Christianity as practiced is actually the oldest form of the big three monotheisms- just a fact- though of course historically (predominantly) Hebrew identity is older than either the Christian or the Islamic.
Second, the TANAKH consists of the same books that the KJV does but ordered with respect to Torah (TA-the 5 books of Moses) Prophets (NA) Writings (KH).

Attached: b07586579e67073a8d849024452adc19.jpg (220x330, 13K)

All the neopagans are LARPers

show bob

Unrelated but Christians of lit
Is this accurate? Since I'm a recent convert I can't really judge

Attached: iudylzctewa21.png (936x3000, 901K)

Ressentiment by Max Scheler shits on Nietzsche desu

Attached: Ressentiment Scheler.png (1430x260, 29K)

>I am my own master
>you are your own slave

Welcome home. The pic is pretty accurate, you don't wan't to be the guy at the top and further you go below the more saintly you'll become.

>Militia Immaculate
>St. Louis de Monfort
>St. Margaret Mary Alacoque
>Miraculous Medal
>Scapular of Our of Mount Carmel
>Daily Eucharist adoration
>Monarchist
>Laughs at Sedevacantist arguments
>etc.

All good.

>a weak religion
What does this mean? Do you want a more 'liberating' religion, a more 'empowering' religion, a more 'fresh' religion, or even 'and that's a good thing' religion?

Oh wait, I forgot; 'I'm pickle Rick' religion.

Thanks, I'll use it then as a kind of guide to aid me in the way
>takes communion without confession
Been doing that whenever I was forced to go to mass heh
They should introduce religion to kids in a different manner. I never really questioned I could go to hell for disobeying God, everyone around me was a cultural/average catholic and it bloody pays

Hahaha you are such a faggot. Just kill him already, if you really believe in God, you must.

Think of hatred as a vice and try repeating that.

>Hebrew identity is older than either the Christian or the Islamic.
Christians inherited that identity. Jews, though, inherit theirs from Cain.

My pleasure. i took communion once when I was very little when I asked my parents why the other people were going to get it and I wasn't and they just said "go then", and so I did. You need not worry, If you took the Eucharist knowing nothing about the proper way to take it then you're not guilty of the sin, this is called invincible ignorance. Now, if you know that you aren't supposed to take the Eucharist in a state of sin and you do so anyways then you are guilty of a grave sin. Your fellow parishioners probably don't about this either so have mercy on them and pray for them and if the topic comes up explain the teachings of the Church, cite the various Catechisms, etc.

>everyone around me was a cultural/average catholic and it bloody pays
I'm no Sedevacantist but this really is the spirit of Vatican ll's fault and many parents failed to transmit the faith to their children.

Though I would add my two cents here. I'm the farthest thing from an authority on Christ there can be, so bear with me if I miss something obvious. Always happy to be proven wrong and learn.

Christ has two commandments:
1. Love God
2. Love others as we love ourselves, and as you love God.

God is the Word incarnate (note: not is like, but is incarnate. Is the thing).

God is Christ, Christ is God, Christ is The Holy Spirit, God is The Holy Spirit, and they are all the Word incarnate.

Now take the Greek word Logos, which translates to "Word", "Reason", "Plan", "Rationality", and so on.

Christ (God, The Holy Spirit) is Logos incarnate. Therefore believing in Christ is belief in the word, reason, and rationality.

The Old Testament has many commandments because the Jews believe in God. Their commandments are written in stone. The issue here is that if a law is written in stone it means nothing, as those who follow it can become dogmatic and subvert the law to whatever end they wish.

Christ has two commandments. But he is crucially the son of Man. He is the son of God, and through Christ mankind is welcomed into the Kingdom of Heaven.

Christ, being a man, teaches us that the law is a living thing written in the hearts of men, not in stone.

It is no accident that love for god and your fellow man are Christ's commandments. Because to love others as you love yourself, and to love god as you love others, is the most rational means of existence that exists.

You must live with love in your heart. As wise as serpents and as harmless as doves. Love for God is not an excuse to be dogmatic and ignorant, nor is it an excuse to bring harm onto your fellow man.

The miracle is that every man can know Christ, and thus can choose to live with love and rationality.

But the divine simplicity of these two commandments are not an excuse to live a reckless life. We are born into sin, and cannot escape sin so long as we live. But to live recklessly is to ignore God, to ignore Christ, and Logos, and The Holy Spirit.

Therefore it isn't a sin to love another man and share his bed, but to do so is to live recklessly.

By their fruits you will know them.

Do not hate homosexuals, because to do so is the same as hating the ugly for being wretched. But also you cannot freely given them reign in your society either, because by their actions to live recklessly (having anal sex leads to disease and uses the rectum to its in-proper / irrational function), this choice subverts their lifestyles, and thus subverts rational living.

Why do gay men wear drag? Why do they use every colour of the rainbow and live in degeneracy? Of course this isn't all men, but it is also irrational to deny that homosexuality leads to degenerate thoughts and behaviour.

Perhaps it is enough to have an understanding of the sin you commit, so long as you are doing it with love, and understand that you are acting irrationally, and thus against God.

But God is everything, as is Christ, and thus the tragedy of being a man on this Earth is made clear. Our inherent sin gives us wants and desires that subvert our own rationality. In a secular society degeneracy flourishes because there is no reason (literally) not to act irrationally. There is a reason love for God is the foundation of alcoholics anonymous; because without love for Christ why should one control their irrational desires?

Love Christ and act rationally, do not live recklessly, but do not let your rationality alone become dogmatic, as you must also love others as you love god and yourself. That is the reason why the Kingdom of Heaven is not on Earth, but with God, because on Earth we must live in an imperfect world as best we can, as a test for our love of Christ and God.

This seems like a good a place as any to ask. I've heard various arguments to the effect that Christ and Paul always reaffirmed rather than dismantled or did away with the OT laws, including the ones about unclean animals from Leviticus, for example. I can't go into too many details but I also recall mention that whenever they rebuked the pharisees and others for being corrupted it wasn't due to their adherence to the OT laws but because of the excessive additions they had made to them, on top of the fact that they hadn't taken God's commandments to heart (examples of this would be Titus 1:12-16 and Colossians 2:16-23, along with some disputes over the use of the word unclean in the NT as the Greek isn't quite isn't quite the same as the Hebrew word that corresponds to unclean in the OT, as well as some general translation issues). Has anyone investigated this possibility to any greater extent? Would just about any modern denomination call this idea heresy? I feel like it's plausible but have too little experience to accurately judge, so any thoughts are welcome.

Love god, love others, love yourself, don't act recklessly or irrationally.

Done.

this desu

Max Scheler blows Nietzsche out the water

Interesting to know, but this invincible ignorance isn't blind to, let's say, "basic worldly morality" (killing, stealing...) is it? You are a citizen of a society, you must have heard of the laws and learnt them; in a equal manner I think it happens with Christians: despite having received bad education, I was put in the way of faith and I can be blamed for not having taken an interest in it, not reading the catechism
I failed to put my will at a good disposition to know what my Lord commands, therefore, I was voluntarily ignorant. Anyway I did a general confession and made sure to mention my nescience, with prior contrition of course.
Yeah, I've been going to confession weekly and it's always only me, might be the time but I never saw people confessing

>Vatican ll's fault
Comparing today's state of faith to my grandparents, it really seems like the church is at man's service and not man at His Lord service, like it should be

Attached: Christ embracing Saint Bernard__- Francisco Ribalta.jpg (1360x1920, 1.47M)

I have a gay friend, he always tells me I'm dumb for being a Christian: we should make our lives a chain of happiness and pleasure because that's better than "not living your life as you are waiting for the eternal life and not doing what you like". I told him several times the christian liffe is the most rational and happy there can be , this life is ending, next is not, better secure the eternal than the ephemeral; he is just a dancing corpse, out of his grave! He has to return to his nation, under the land! Christ is the only bringer of life, indeed.
Making thousands of pleasurable acts that are being erased with time is like building a sand castle in your garden when the weatherman announced a bloody tornado
I don't hate him, instead I feel pity because he doesn't know yet, like all humans doing " their" will. You don't have to feel superior, God puts you in the way when he wants; let your bliss expand to others
Shall Chris deanimalize this world

>as a test for our love of Christ and God.
That's what I would say to all Sedevacantists. You say the pope is evil so you fear and don't face it. What are you doing when a greater evil comes? You'll run, like this time.
I heard some say they'll become Orthodox because of the Pope. What will you become if their patriarchs become evil too? Orthodox Sedevacantist?
A simple test of obedience is what I see, act by this nice quote
>Love for God is not an excuse to be dogmatic and ignorant, nor is it an excuse to bring harm onto your fellow

I know my English is a pain to read :^) I'm a bit rusty

>a weak religion espousing slave morality and is thus ultimately doomed to failure?
This doesn't actually mean anything.

No one can give you reasons or facts to believe in God you retard. You just do it. You don't read a book and then say "I have found God now". You really think anyone in the world can provide you certainty? Not even the disciples of Jesus were certain of his resurrection.

I haven't read the guy. But I think he misunderstands a bit Freddy's position. On the one hand I concede that Christian love is the form a form of Agape, which stems from a mutual respect and love for the the good. But on the other hand Nietzsche's problem isn't really the "love your neighbor" part. Its the Christian humility that becomes morality. The strong is bad and the weak is good. Its a reversal of a titanic propositions that literally smashed the classical way of looking at the world. This shit is already incubating in the New Testament with the "lamb shall lie with the wolf" messianism, truth and love persevere not out of a personal ethics, but out of faith and prostration to the Monotheistic God. Secondly the Christianity, unlike Judaism, made universal this relationship of submission through sin. By definition man is not in an equal relationship with God because he has to make up for both the original sin and Jesus exchanging himself for the souls of humanity. There is love yes, but there are also tremendous demands that led to what Nietzsche called the slave morality out of this smallness of the christian individual against God. He has prostrate himself, reduce himself, become celibate to be closer to God etc.

read the guy, it isn't too long if I recall correctly and after that, I propose the Christianity that Nietzsche was talking about was actually Lutheranism and the implicit Manichaeism within it (Catholicism, early Christianity, is drastically different from them).