I love the figure of Christ so goddamn much

You can't get more beautiful than Christian eschatology, terrifying but beautiful, the problem is you can't really begin to understand the sequence of events if you haven't practically memorized the Bible.

>the original architect

Attached: theArchitect.jpg (1500x1000, 104K)

I saw a "good" description of the Book of Revelation; Supernatural, Evangelion and Nocturne grossly underexaggerated the Apocalypse.

its beyond me to try to explain it to you, but if you got it, you would believe. and i don't mean you don't understand it.

based lad, the Lord is with you.

Attached: christlamb.jpg (1651x2200, 614K)

Thank you user

Attached: 1547923247621.png (1001x823, 806K)

>I also read the Bible and even though I still don't believe in God as some omnipresent diety
read aristotle. read aquinas. read duns scotus on the first principle. become acquainted with the ontological argument and the five ways. read plato's republic, learn about the form of the good. then put it all together, and you will *know* God exists.

happy friday anons

Attached: dormlife.jpg (1500x1000, 134K)

You can't have 3 interdependent dependent entities. You can't make a square a circle. The Trinity is hogwash

>an omnipotent being that can’t be fully understood by a mortal being does something that can’t be understood by a mortal being
Wow

>hogwash

Attached: 1522473327203.png (645x729, 80K)

God doesn't contradict anything you retard. The Trinity is a contradiction. I believe in God. An omnipotent one. Not a triad of polytheistic Greek leftovers. God doesn't need 2 other beings to mandate his will. He is not dependent on anything or anyone else to carry out anything. Otherwise, he would be DEPENDENT and therefore, not ALL POWERFUL

>"The Trinity is a contradiction."
>dum dum doesn't know that all three Persons of the Trinity are God. they share one substance.

Attached: wojakbrainletair.jpg (623x450, 30K)

>Atoms can't behave like both a wave and a particle! Wave-particle duality is hogwash.

Just because you can't understand how something works doesn't mean it isn't true.

Empirical evidence proves quantum mechanics works even if it can't be understood. God can't be understood either, but there's enough empirical evidence to prove His existence.

>God shares his omnipotence
That means he's not omnipotent you fucking dork hahhaa holy mental gymnastics.
Not answering my argument. Cope harder

>he doesn't know that they are God, and God is them, and they do not depend on one another but rather have revealed themselves thus for their pleasure as far as you know
nobody puts baby Jesus in a corner

Nice babble sperg. Typical Christian comeback when presented with logic

stupid or trolling

Just because you didn't like the answer doesn't make it a bad argument.

Your statement was that the trinity is illogical. I gave you an example were the illogical is factually accepted to exist. Therefore, your argument that the trinity can't exist because it's illogical is a logical fallacy, since it's the same thing as saying quantum mechanics doesn't exist because it's illogical.

>more failure to understand
if you can't articulate why I'm wrong, you really shouldn't be in this argument.

The Trinity teaches the 3 entities are distinct from each other. Does that mean that each one has their own autonomous will, or are they interdependent of each other to make a decision? Either way is a contradiction as if each entity was autonomous, omnipotent, it wouldn't need the two other beings. If the latter, then being dependent on the other 2 for a decision means they are not all powerful. If that's too hard for you to understand, I'll explain it further.

>Does that mean that each one has their own autonomous will, or are they interdependent of each other to make a decision?
No.

They are distinct, but that does not make them entities with separate wills. Our understanding is they share one substance: they are God, alone and together, and there is no will in one to subvert another. Father in heaven is perfect, Jesus said this. God is perfect. Therefore there can be no disharmony -- disharmony indicates a failure and a lack -- between the three Persons of God.

That is to say, being perfect prohibits the possibility of falling short in any way, by lack or other failure.

I feel the same way OP. He's easily my favourite figure from The Bible and always has been. I was never an atheist (which is funny because my parents are both agnostic), but I was also never an actively practicing Christian. Still, I try to have firm moral values and respect for all people. Most Christians are nice people in my experience, but I feel that many are too attached to the rituals of the religion rather than obsorbing the core message of the Gospels and trying to live that out to the best of their ability.

I kind of take issues with the notion of there being "saved" Christians, since it implies that they're free of sin. I personally wouldn't consider myself "saved", since I have plenty of sins that I'm unlikely to fully overcome, but I just try to make sure these sins either don't harm anyone, or only harm myself rather than others. I don't think
I'm worthy of Heaven. In fact I'm not sure where God will put me in the afterlife. I just hope he can forgive me for a few personal vices.

>since it implies that they're free of sin
This is not accurate.

"Saved" is mostly a protestant term, but aligns pretty much with the Catholic benchmark for salvation: baptism.

Baptism does not guarantee salvation, and all men are sinners. No one who ever lived is free of sin, except Mary and Jesus. Read the parable of the pharisee and the tax man. Too many Christians sound like the pharisee, and too few are solemnly regretful of their sins like the tax man.

No one is worthy of heaven, since we all fail to live up to God's perfection and holiness. Therefore, it is only through Jesus Christ that we can commune with God. This was not the case before the fall, when we communed with God in the Garden of Eden, had everlasting life and could know anything by simply asking God.

The wills are still interdependent on each other. It's logically impossible to have 3 independent beings simultaneously make a decision. By virtue of necessity

i recommend you all to read this book and reflect on the amount of physical pain he had to endure for our salvation.

Attached: 71LKre-6wKL.jpg (946x1360, 177K)

>The wills are still interdependent on each other.
How do you know this.

>It's logically impossible to have 3 independent beings simultaneously make a decision.
For the third time: they share one substance. They are known to use as three Persons, but they are (again) each and together God. I've already explained this. It is not possible for them to have a disharmony of will, because God is perfect.

Christians sounding like the Pharisee is exactly my problem with some Christians, and is part of the reason I'm sceptical of partaking in the various rituals. The worst types are those who get into politics and talk about how morally superior they are, as if they had any right to judge what's morally superior. Morality is complex, and I think Christ knew that, which is why he befriended thieves and prositutes. In a way, I see myself like those thieves and prostitutes-- I'm someone who hardly lives the life that puritanical Christians would promote, but I accept Christ as my saviour even though I feel like I don't deserve to be loved.

Thanks for your responses, bless you user.
If I'm to see your argument, which I get it, I really do. You're saying their choices are simultaneous and there is no disharmony because they are 1 and they are perfect. Granted. But the way I'm seeing it is, that so God performs an act of free will. It's going THROUGH the son, and THROUGH the holy spirit. Because of this chain, this (my argument) interdependence on each other to create decisions, is what makes God DEPENDENT on something else. Therefore he is not all powerful.

Ivan Kramskoy's "Christ in the Desert" like all modern art is sentimentalist in nature and fails to capture the inherant spirituality of the Christian mysteries beyond mere sentimentalism. I understand why people are attracted to it, but art influenced by western realism is deeply anti-traditional and more often leads the believer into thinking faith is merely some emotional journey and not one of the transcendent spirit.

>he allows his disgust for fellow sinners to keep him away from the real presence of the Lord
user...

as the chinese girl said: forgive these morons. love God, and love them, because the everloving God commanded it. show mercy upon them, as he would.

Attached: mercy.png (474x545, 17K)

but there is no chain. they are the one God. one substance. revealed as three, but actually one. remember that Jesus was fully man and fully divine, he was consubstantial with the Father. so it is with the Holy Spirit, the helper.

you speak the truth, user. thats why i prefer la solitude du christ by alphonse osbert. what do you think?

Attached: Alphonse_Osbert_-_La_Solitude_du_Christ.jpg (1600x1050, 405K)

no u. if you fail to understand the full meaning of the painting I suggest you have failed to understand the person of Jesus and what he did in life. his suffering belongs to every man. his anxiety about his interior life, his responsibility to mankind, the burden of suffering and death... in the desert, in the garden: he is us.

Attached: christ_ifyouonlyknew.jpg (1569x1092, 413K)

It's better at least.

Your reduction of religion to sentimentalism is a product of the European Romantic movement and is completely anachronistic. You will notice that in traditional Christian art, emotion was not an end in of itself and was rather an analogical means to convey a higher spiritual message. Despite Byzantines having the ability to do so, never once did they consider painting iconography in such a way as that image. Realism only arrived into artwork after the decline of the Christian tradition and the pseudo-metaphysical anthropromorphism of the Renaissance. There is a great danger in these sorts of pseudo-Christian artforms not because they are bad, but because they limit the metaphysical view of the Christian tradition on to the horizontal plane of becoming.

Attached: tempted.jpg (1200x1440, 458K)

1 does not equal 3. Deuteronomy and one of the commandments clearly states that God is 1. If there are 3 people on a desk making decisions, regardless if they're equal on all matters and subjects, they're are still 3 distinct entities larping as 1. It's a polytheistic idea brought almost 1000 years later after the Old Testament

>brainlets will never understand the trinity

Attached: 1565308672675.jpg (250x241, 7K)

Nice ad hominem. You're delusional. It's illogical and the Trinity wasn't even mentioned until the Nicean council 300 years later after Jesus' death. You're a polytheistic pagan larping as a monotheist. That's why Christianity is dying. Keep recycling frog memes to justify your twisted paganism

are you a jew? a muslim?

Can you explain Cornithians 15:50 to me? Why was Jesus against materialism?

Neither. Just can't defend paganism.

>I love the figure of Christ so goddamn much
>goddamn
>taking the lord’s name in vain
>pretending you actually love him

Attached: 8603AE56-7478-4CC4-A240-3A5EB1AF8DB3.jpg (213x223, 11K)

>that's why Christianity is dying
After the theological confirmation of the trinity at the council of Nicea, the faith did nothing but grow. The trinity is definitely not why the faith is dying. I also find it very difficult to take seriously anyone who unironically uses a phrase so meaningless and haphazardly applied as "larping"

>endured pain in order to save humanity...
>...from what he was going to do to humanity if he didn’t allow himself to suffer

Attached: 828FD348-ABE8-4AD3-A50E-039D8B5886C1.jpg (1298x1145, 159K)

Yeah the Christian faith really took a nose dive after *checks notes* AD 325.

>You should find your own cross and carry it as far as you can until you collapse under its weight and die, but the struggle is worth the effort.
Is it though? I feel like this is a popular opinion, but I don't believe in it.

Jesus never mentioned the trinity. The OT strictly forbids paganism (3 distinct persons as your "God") . The OT was divinely inspired while the NT was interpreted, translated, sections were revisited and revised. Who am I really going to trust more for holy salvation? This extremely edited pagan book (how neat is it that the Greek concept of Trinity was included when Greek intellectuals rewrote and translated those texts? :) )

>Your reduction of religion to sentimentalism is bla bla bla
It's not a reduction. It's addressing the specific point of your failed understanding. Believe me when I say I don't think of Christ as merely a picture. Fucking retard.

>The OT was divinely inspired while the NT was interpreted, translated, sections were revisited and revised.
So you aren't a Jew or Muslim but you say that the OT was divinely inspired?

Regardless, you are not responding to my post. I have no interest discussing the history of theology with you. You said that Christianity somehow declined because of the Trinity, a claim which you clearly cannot justify, judging by your desire to switch topic.

Beautiful post. It makes me want to try harder to believe. All the Christians I know are dumb normies. The Faith needs people who are poor in spirit now more than ever.

Seems as if I've hit a nerve.

With your pseudointellectual strawmen? Yes. Now try addressing the point instead of launching ad hominem. Clearly you don't understand: God is serious business.

being called a brainlet for putting the holy trinity at the same level as "3 entities larping as one" is the least you deserve for your blasphemy. May God have mercy on you --- defending yourself as "muh ad hominem" wont work on Him.

>complaining about ad hominem
You were the one that called me a "fucking retard". How ironic.

You clearly didn't even read my post since you implied that I thought you were reducing Jesus to a picture. That is not what I said. Try reading instead of green texting it as "blah blah" and calling anything that is beyond your immediate desire to read "pseudointellectual strawman."

why would anybody worship a crazy jewish hippy?

Blessed and breadpilled post OP.

Fuck off
Ministry ruined the industrial name. I liked it better when it was performance art/electronic punk like Throbbing Gristle and Cabaret Voltaire, but now it's either bland metal music or edgy edm for goths to twerk to

you gotta calm down and repent for the words you used against the other user. he was talking about how the sensate cosmovision (that began in the renaissance and reached its peak in modernity) reduces, in art, the depiction of the sacred to the sphere of the psyche instead of the spirit.

except renaissance art does nothing to actually harm knowledge of the spirit. bad catechesis does. all the great works before Christ was cartoonized still exist, and are still great.

*reads brothers k once*

Just because you think something is immensely and profoundly beautiful doesnt mean its true

>cartoonized
thats a poor term. the lack of perspective doesn't mean they didn't know it. it's that they focused on the portrayting of the immortal truths instead of trying to depict the sensate reality
>except renaissance art does nothing to actually harm knowledge of the spirit
i agree. the art is merely the mirror of the period's cosmovision, there's where lies the problem.

that user's claim about the superiority of the traditional christian art still holds though

>Loves Christ
>Uses His most holy name for vanities
It's like you want to go to hell. Also Christ is "profoundly" human because he was fully God and fully man, what we call the hypostatic union. I hate to burst your bubble but Christ couldn't have sided with Satan because of this union, where Christ was perfect because he was fully God and God is incapable of committing any sinful act as sin itself is defined as being opposed to the will of God. But he did feel the tortuous temptations of the devil, you are right about that. This isn't to diminish your wonder, the Bible truly is the greatest story ever told because it is true. God bless user, begom gadolig.

Attached: 1529465954800.jpg (700x6826, 600K)

the trinity is not hard to understand

god the father is the first, and all other things are emanations of him, while god himself is not reduced by the emanations

the holy spirit is the force that pervades throughout the entire world and gives life, not an entity on it's own

jesus is the man who transcends duality - he has status as jesus the man, and his connection with the holy spirit has turned him into jesus -christ. he is a god that has descended to help people directly, but it also profound in the sense that a man can raise himself up to god and reduce the separation

but the immortal truths are the reality. he suffered and died. for others, for all. I think the painting in question is very moving and aptly describes this feeling, of carrying this burden while being fully man.

I am still an atheist, so Christ inspires me more as a human rather than as God's son. I don't reject the spirituality, I am just not as interested in it.

I feel almost the same but I literally belive in him and his ressurection. but even if it didnt happen it wouldn't make his teachings less true. he gets human psychology so right that it scares me. I am actually benefiting from doing what he said we should do and my life is improving in ways I cannot explain. Story of his life,death and ressurection is profound to me on many levels.

Attached: Nietzsche2.png (1240x590, 158K)

>Ignoring the fact that He is fully God and therefore knows scripture better than any human ever could and that's why He schooled the Rabbis as a child in the temple
Bruh
Of course, He was fully man just as you and I.
I know these concepts are very complex but don't make such ridiculous claims unless you want to be ridiculed for them. There is perhaps more scholarship on things related to Christianity than anything else that has ever been or ever will be written.
The "persons" of the trinity is a nominal distinction that may trip you up. When we talk about the trinity we are talking about three parts of an entity that are not real distinctions, meaning none of them exist outside of each other and none of them can do anything apart from each other. The Son cannot do anything that isn't the will of the Father whom He is consubstantial with, nor can the Holy Spirit, which proceeds from the Father and the Son, do anything out of accordance with the will of the Father.

He got you cornered, you're an atheist now.

yes, but not reality as we see it. the impressionist movement for example started as a revolt against realistic art but in the end they still resorted to the emotions provoked by the material properties of their paintings.
>I think the painting in question is very moving and aptly describes this feeling, of carrying this burden while being fully man.
i agree. it's an amazing painting and all but it's part of the realistic movement, and that's what was being attacked, the realistic movement.

i personally love bouguereau's paintings but they are not sacred paintings, they are not on the same level as the icons

Attached: Compassion - Bouguereau.jpg (977x2144, 243K)

luke 3;21-22
When all the people were being baptized, JESUS was baptized too. And as he was praying, heaven was opened and the HOLY SPIRIT descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a VOICE came from heaven: “You are my SON, whom I love; with you I AM well pleased.”

Attached: trinity-wallpaper-16.png (432x412, 15K)

So much projection in your post. I'm an atheist because I study life as a biochemist. I've recreated parts of it from scratch. And I study genes in lesser organisms before blasting them and finding similar ones in humans. Because mitochondrial DNA leads to a common ancestor. And because life follows the laws of chemistry.

>"I've recreated parts of it from scratch."
>this is supposed to be his big bad posit
Yes but were you the very first to do so? And by first I don't mean just humans.

please user inform us when you've created something ex nihilo. and please acknowledge you are not the only 'scientist', there are many who happen to be christians. rupert sheldrake is specialized in biochemistry as well and had some great insights after studying the auxin system in plants

Again, I'm still an atheist, its just that I'm glad I'm no longer brainlet thinking christianity is some kind of shitty sect for retarded people, but it is in fact more profound than I could've thought

Science is cool but it doesn't offer anything spiritually and lacks that depth. When science tries to sell itself as an ideology its just basic humanism, nothing new or interesting. It maybe amazing for a scientist but not for the rest of humanity.

>John 1:1-3
>1 In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.
>2 The same was in the beginning with God
>3 All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.
>John 10:30
>I and the Father are one.
>Matthew 3:16-17
>16 And Jesus being baptized, forthwith came out of the water: and lo, the heavens were opened to him: and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him.
>17 And behold a voice from Heaven, saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
>Matthew 28:19
>Going therefore, teach ye all nations: baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
Keep moving the goalposts, kike, you're not fooling anyone. NT is divinely inspired same as the OT, but of course you reject that reality because it would have certain consequences regarding your behavior. You act as your objections are unique and haven't been addressed by the Church over the past 2,000 years.

You've cracked the mystery of abiogenesis you stupid fucking faggot?

oh user that isnt very charitable

Attached: 1565486025265.jpg (900x900, 140K)

I want to be more religious but the current pope is a cuck so I'm still Lutheran instead of Catholic.

I feel shame, because I'm going down a bottomless pit of degeneracy everyday. I love Christ and I hate what I'm doing to his creation with my degeneracy, but I can't stop

go to a priest and ask for a confession. i'll pray for you

John 14:6
>And Jesus saith unto him: I am the way, the truth, and the life, no one cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Get saved today, and walk down a path of enlightenment Yea Forumsizens.

Attached: 1560480415713m.jpg (1024x784, 248K)

>I've recreated parts of it from scratch
So you've discovered how RNA turns into DNA?

Not Yea Forums

>the Christ figure, from the bible, literally The Book at the root of the western canon
>not lit

Attached: apureadingdisgusted.png (384x378, 131K)

Christ is not the bible
This sort of thread belongs in /his/

>atheism can indeed be a religion if someone just wouldn't shut up about being atheist and proving that God doesn't exist
i don't think you know what a religion is

Anyone who has had children has created life from scratch. As man is made in God's image, the gift of creation is bestowed upon us by Him. The creation of life, far from destroying God, merely reflects His glory even more.

>Christ is not the bible
True, but even the OT by itself is still an immensely influential piece of literature.

That's a modalist heresy. The persons of the trinity are all fully God but are distinct from each other, they aren't nominal.

had a similar experience, just not ending in Christianity
>as a kid: "why are you giving me fairy tales saying they're fake while giving me equally fantastic Bible stories saying they're real? are you sure this is a real thing?"
>as a preteen: "maybe if I humor them and pretend to believe it'll start making sense"
>as a teen: "nevermind that was a dumb idea, science has better explanations anyway"
>as a college freshman: "what the fuck, science doesn't have all the answers. Christianity still doesn't make sense, but there probably is a creator deity after all. I'm going to investigate metaphysics now"
now I'm pandeist panpsychist

>A, B, and C are all D, but A != B != C
how do you fix this?
>1, 2, and 3 are all 4 (wrong), but 1 != 2 != 3 (right)
>2, 2, and 2 are all 2 (right), but 2 != 2 != 2 (wrong)

beautiful post, user

Attached: file.png (400x388, 148K)

come on, just stop masturbating. it's not that difficult.

Yes

I understand why people are religious: they CRAVE meaning in their life. They NEED a parental figure of heavenly quality. Perhaps they are failures at life or have been abandoned by their loved ones due to their own vices. Religion fills a whole. "There's a plan for you." "The path to heaven is easy so long as you follow the leader."

If you want to believe in religion, fine. In fact, if you find happiness in religion, good. If you find meaning, contentedness, and drive? Great.

But don't grandstand to me and others who aren't in your bliss. You've found your drug, your drink; that which gets you through the day. Trying to push it onto others in such a way makes you look like a desperate sycophant.

Nigga chill, nobody imposes religion on you, I just wanted to share my joy

Seethe harder.

Attached: 1566322499763s.jpg (227x250, 9K)

major cringe

You seem like a honest man on a voyage. May gentle winds always propel your ship forward, perhaps to Faith or perhaps not.
You on the other hand look like a retard.

Wow.
Projecting much.

of all the comments to take exception to

Couldn't be more fake and gay

>HOW YOU DARE TAKING EXCEPTION TO A MOUNTAIN OF AD HOMINEM AND ATTEMPTS TO ASSASSINATE YOUR CHARACTER
If people argued to atheists like they argue to others they would pass their short british lives crying in their safe space.

no, I agree that it was a bad argument, but it is not even close to being the worst comment in the thread. why did that one, given the others' existence, get six (You)'s?

Who knows? Emergent proprieties of the minds of thousands of autists posting at the same time? Black Swan Event?
Simple tiredness and frustations at atheists always using the same arguments despite them being exploded Since the times of Epycurus?

>I think that Christ is so amazing because despite being God's son he is still profoundly human, and he fucking chooses to die for humanity, this is his voluntary decision. He could've sided with Satan and ruled the world, but he chose not to, he chose to suffer for the sins of others, for the original sin and for all the sins to come. According to canon, he saw all the sins of the future while nailed to the cross, he saw holocaust, two World Wars, infinite murders, rapes, total injustice and he still chose to forgive, and he chose to suffer for all the worst people despite being probably the best human to walk the earth.

Extremely blessed post, thanks user

>the Trinity was confirmed at the Council of Nice
While the term "Trinitas" is not found in the Bible, the idea of the "Trinity" was very prevalent among the Christian community before Nicea. The following link is just one example of a priest/bishop/etc confirming the doctrine of the Trinity without actually coining the term itself. Keep in mind, these priests and bishops follow a line that lead to the first Apostles themselves; this means that priest X was taught by Y who was taught by one of the Apostles. You get my point.

newadvent.org/fathers/0601.htm

It's funny when aethiests try to claim that lack of empirical evidence proves God doesn't exist. Saints and theologists have been trying to find empirical evidence for centuries, the big bang theory was created by a saint. Darwin believed God was still the perfect being. We aren't scared of or the lack thereof empirical evidence.

It was a Catholic priest.

You seem to think that plurality cannot exist in unity.
Allow me to give you a real world example:
We live in a three-dimensional world, with X, Y, and Z axes. Now, X, Y, and Z are distinct from one another, however they all share the same substance, this "axisness", if that makes sense. X is not Y, and Y is not Z. As for us, we "translate" this three dimensional world into the world we see today: "one".

nobody actually thinks that no evidence implies falsity, but if you really need a strawman, then go ahead. if you would rather attack a more accurate model of atheism, then I'd go after their tendency to argue from absurdity (i.e. Russell's Teapot, magic sky daddy, etc)

Big thanks to everyone in the thread for celebrating another decade of a dying McReligion. As always, it is proud of its consumption by the masses, perfected by Levantine tribes that would go on to make McReligion the Islamic edition.

I'm always impressed by Christians having no idea who they are culturally and spiritually besides the fact that they are Christians. I mean, who they REALLY are, whether they can look back in history and find spiritual kinship with their pre-McReligion ancestors, who had a naturalistic, immanent view of the world that is genuinely spiritual, who did not condense their entire salvation, their strength into a desert God that make them apologize for their natural bodies.

If your rites are welcome to everyone, with a doctrine that repeatedly hammers home absolute concepts transcending without an identifiable culture, I have a hard time believing your impressions of miracle and mystery isn't a business product.

The Greeks had it great. They had the intellect to celebrate the cultic and the heroic. Thanks for killing native spiritualities like the Pyrenean Ibex.

The thing about Christians in particular is they will never stop praising Jesus in every way possible, and they revel in the fact that there are millions just like them forming one amorphous, culturally-ambiguous crowd, as a metaphoric 'herd'.

Whereas there was a plethora of paths to catharsis and meaning, specific to culture and time, now there is just an understood, watered down path - just ask a Southerner to eat a steamed Okra, a traditional Southern dish, and he wouldn't, not after a life of McDonalds.

A redeeming effort may be Gnostiticism, but I don't know enough about it.

this book sold me on Jesus and that he is real. the OT has hundreds of passages foretelling the coming of Jesus Christ why have I never heard about this in school or church? these people are seriously dropping the ball.

Attached: iu[1].jpg (406x630, 51K)

Christ user, no wonder people have a hard time taking christfags seriously

>I can't explain u just gotta like, belieeeeeeve

Fuck off.

A ,B and C have a D property but A != B != C

I mean the three parts of the trinity cannot exist independent of each other as user was claiming it was a pantheon of sorts.
Cringe

just read Dante. Kierkegaard, Aquinas.

Boldly boasted that he had died and come back from the dead. More so than Jesus, the wretchedly diminished God of the small man who stammered the word 'infinity'. Land went deeper, died a deeper death than any and rose again, and was raised out of the grave. His spirit has continued, his body will eventually return, and it is by the intervention of a priest who could and did bring him Outside that he is now able to continue in his task.

Attached: Dark-Enlightenment-Nick-Land2334683534.jpg (620x350, 49K)

I don't really care much about Land but he said in a podcast that Atheism is just extreme Protestantism which was pretty interesting

>the sacrifice of Christ is of great metaphorical importance: you do not commit suicide, you live for the people that love you, and they do too.
I thought that God killed himself as Jesus, his human hypostasis

um sweaty I'm pretty sure Jesus was killed by Romans on the accusations of the Jews

an omnipotent being allowed himself to die when he didn't have to? honey, that sounds like suicide
t. Christian who thinks that suicide being a sin is the greatest and most obvious error the church ever made

That's not Land's idea, it's Moldbug's, who in turn gets it from a variety of Conservative authors (in the sense of De Maistre, not in the sense of the Republican party) who come to the same conclusion but don't actually run with it.

Wow never heard that one before

Attached: 1437893597876.gif (500x281, 1.05M)

I agree with everything OP has said, even the greatness and divine ability of Jesus so far as to die for our sins, but I can’t overcome myself to believe unwaveringly that Jesus is the Son of God.
Is there literature to aid me, since on my own I am failing.

This is a really good post thank you for sharing. I kept thinking about it and just saved it to my notes

The prophecies that Jesus fulfills are overwhelming, but couldn't someone who is well versed in the OT just fill in a bunch of those details? Many of the prophecies are fulfilled in very roundabout ways

this is getting into one of my greatest misgivings for Christianity, and I'm going to use it to segue into my own question:
if the Bible is thought to be the word of God, and faith is said to be sola scriptura, then how do we deal with the fact that it was written by human (and therefore biased, fallible, and of course sinful) hands? how can I believe a religion that both condemns humanity as naturally sinful and trusts the Biblical authors as having been fully trustworthy?

i'm not a very emotional person but for whatever reason I was reading the bible a few weeks ago and came across Mark 10:16

> And he took the children in his arms, placed his hands on them and blessed them.

Something about reading that made me tear up a little bit. Can't put a finger on what it was, but the image of the incarnate god embracing his children and comforting them was so beautiful and loving. I think I understand where you are coming from.

Attached: 1541155818390.jpg (899x1200, 523K)

>faith is said to be Sola Scriptura
I don't understand what you're trying to say, user. Are you trying to articulate the Protestant position on authority in saying it's Scripture alone? Or are you trying to say something completely different by saying that faith is in scripture alone?

is the Protestant position not correct? sorry, i was raised Lutheran, please explain how the Bible isn't the ultimate authority on the religion and the fundamental source of one's faith

I wasn't going for arguing with you on whether or.not the Protestant position is correct. Assuming you're that user I replied to, I was trying to make sense of your post. What a none you trying to say there? I didn't quite understand.

>you do not commit suicide, you live for the people that love you, and they do too

Had an aneurysm reading this.

>The Trinity teaches the 3 entities are distinct from each other.
It teaches the opposite retard

>arguing
in retrospect, it sounded pretty confrontational, but I only meant it as curiosity. sorry
>What a none you trying to say there?
what?

Please don't post again.

Based, God bless you

Attached: resurrection2.jpg (1024x1553, 326K)

Then why do I feel, looking at Kramskoy's painting, the same things I feel when reading the Bible?

Anons, how do get past this reactionary and emotional view on religion? I was baptized on the insistence of my father's mother, but was raised secular outside that side of my family. I was aethiest for a long time, but now I want to affirm my belief in God but I am so lost and have no community or peers to look to. I read Fear and Trembling and Repetition and got into Catholic mythos. Fell in love with Jeanne D'arc. My want to believe feels so fake that I can't affirm my belief... I feel lead by reactionary emotions and I can't tell if I love whatever I even think I think God is.

And I know Kierkegaard is Christian. I've just been reading so much these last few years and Soren really stuck out to me.

If you're posting here then you are indeed probably not sincere. Your interest is not in Christianity but a distorted "Catholicism" -- i.e. not the actual Catholicism that exists, but some extremist hallucination of it that appeals to your reactionary sentiments. It's a common spiritual delusion to be drawn to a false extremist expression of something, out of ignorance not realizing that the thing which is real would condemn your ideas. This doesn't happen only with people interested in Catholicism, but also Orthodoxy and certain variants of Protestantism.

Atonement is not Scriptural, it is a Catholic, i.e. Atheist, Doctrine.

Penal substitutionary atonement is what is taught in scripture.

By Paul or...?

All of Scripture is inspired by God. The author is not relevant.

Indeed, but not all of it is prescriptive, imperative, of even true, much like Satan or the Antichrist are likewise made and maintained by God, but are not at all congruent with God.

If you are implying that Paul's epistles, which are direct apostolic instructions to various churches, are not valid doctrinal sources, then you are a heretic and there is no point having this conversation.

I love him so much bros

Paul isn't even one of the 12, but why would it be heretical, regardless?

>Paul isn't even one of the 12,
And?
>but why would it be heretical, regardless?
Because your intention is to avoid doctrinal instruction so that you can deny orthodox doctrine and promote contrary views. There's no need to be coy. It's not like the idea of, "If I can discredit Paul I can get around x,y,z that I don't like" is anything new.

You're just describing the exact reason why Christ is so tiresome
He is "profoundly human" yet he is also a perfect benevolent martyr who suffers for literally everyone ever
He's the original gary stu and that's exactly why in modern day Christianity he is pushed so hard because he's an entirely positive figure whereas god himself does many very questionable things and is actually complex and much more difficult to reach a true understanding of
With Jesus it's just oh he's a perfect being let's worship him forever
It really is like so many sequels to things where the original protagonist was great and so colorful and interesting but in a flawed slightly ugly way yet always lovable in the end and now the new protagonist has been completely sterilized made unnoffensive, politically correct, streamlined and smoothed out so even your 3 year old can understand them
That's what Jesus is like

Then your interpretation is wrong. Jesus died only to save his elect which were chosen before the foundation of the world. His gospel is a message of condemnation to all reprobates who have been foreordained to Hell in order to glorify God through their endless torment.

Attached: calvin.jpg (234x300, 8K)

You haven't answered WHY that would be heretical.

Clearly state your position on Paul's epistles and I will tell you.

I like Jesus too

Attached: progression.png (892x978, 232K)

Have you read Milton's Paradise Regain'd? It is the most human depiction of Christ in literature, in my opinion; and it give me very close to the same impression as the Kramskoy painting.

It's all about Jesus knowing that he is the savior/ son of God, but he doesn't know what he's supposed to do next. His ministry / mission / message haven't been revealed to him, because it's his job to come up with it. And he comes up with it through conversations with Satan. So great. Extremely fun read.

>he saw holocaust

Stopped reading there.

Attached: 1504198496831.jpg (750x390, 77K)

course the tripfag thinks if you have a job you can't be smart, get a job lad you're in your late twenties and living with your mam

t. Peterson

Attached: Capture+_2019-08-15-16-28-48.png (2006x1135, 2.37M)

An anti-Christian figure, possible the Antichrist.

The usual belief is that God inspired the writers to write works that were free from error in teaching of faith and morals. The greater issue is how these works are discovered or decided upon to form the Bible, and the lack of any controversy outside of the deuterocanonical books is kind of concerning for such a position.
A sola scriptura position is not held by Catholics or Orthodox Christians, though. They'd consider the apostles chosen by Christ, and their successors, to be the guarantor of faith, and accept the Bible as approved by said Church.

>>the idea of original sin (your son should be punished for something you've done)
You people (who tend to be Nazis (or at least Nietzsche-acolytes) fetishizing paganism) should look into the concept of Sippenhaft which was a central part of Germanic law.

>The usual belief is that God inspired the writers to write works that were free from error in teaching of faith and morals.
The orthodox position is that God inspired the writers such that they were free from error. The qualification regarding "faith and morals" is a modern innovation by Christians who believe in evolution, etc.

What are some sources for non-Pauline Christianity? I'm not aware that such a thing even exists.

I would say pray in your head to god and to Jesus to let him guide you
and forgive yourself because Jesus has already saved you and god loves you

fucking idiot
Lol sorry not sorry though
Your beliefs make your life
Why would you not want to believe in Jesus that’s just dumb
Like if you could pick anything to believe in which you can
Why not pick Jesus
He’s the only one that lets god forgive you for everything no matter what you do

Lmfao at the Freud story. Holy shit
Poor fucked soul
Thought he could beat god
Instead becomes goddamned lunatic
As if Jesus isn’t remembered as a symbol of greatness through self sacrifice I mean literally he is the historical pinnacle

All abrahamic religion is a conservative no-fun-allowed blight form the desert realms.
>atheists are the ones that have no critical thinking not christfaggots
Stop baiting people.

We need a religion board so the bible thumping can plague no more.

Or at least post that one loli crying (gif) from The Neverending Story.

Why are Americans so afraid of mysticism? The divinity of Christ cannot separated. It's all or nothing.

The way your posts are structured makes me think you are writing a poem of sorts

>not realizing that Beauty is the visible manifestation of the Good, which is in itself Truth
Ouch!

Don't get your theology from memes, son.

Why are you even here? On Yea Forums I mean.
You talk like a /pol/ite. I'm picking up zero intellectualism in your post. Certainly no curiosity.

You need to go back.

>CHRISTianity

hmmmmmMMMMMMMMM....

Not sure what you're implying. Obviously there are the Gospels. I'm not asking about that but about such a thing as it may have been actually practiced.

Religion has zero intellect moron. I hope you're not that delusional.

You don't deserve to be argued with.

Thank you for saying that user
That’s pretty funny because I’m primarily a prose writer
In fact I was just trying to write poetry for music recently and felt like it was impossible
But shit I see what you mean maybe I can write poetry

>Not sure what you're implying
honey, he's implying that Jesus' words are the basis for denying Paul, please learn what context is

Oh the irony.

Based

Attached: 1561674215369.jpg (1113x705, 394K)

I am far greater than Jesus. You should worship me instead.

>implying that Christians are oppressed
God gave you these trips so that you would know that you're starting down a path of sin

>>I know something is real because of my personal feelings
>>my super ego tells me facts
Emotionally biased retard. You're the ironic one.

Sage also.

"go back he said"

How's about you actually look again and see the referenced old meme there? You go back newfaggot right winger from /r/thedonald.

>but because they limit the metaphysical view of the Christian tradition on to the horizontal plane of becoming
could you expand on this, and perhaps post more examples of appropriate art?

your 15 year old self was right. you are stupid and have no critical thinking skills because you became a christian

Attached: 乃木坂46堀未央奈が食いしん坊に大変身！上海で本場グルメを食べ尽くす-- (1920x1080, 2.51M)

Happy 16th user!!!

Attached: 24B680FA-84E9-48EB-B428-17813CA3B640.jpg (644x597, 52K)

Daily reminder that no amount of mental gymnastics will save your face in front of God if you believe in the trinity. You are simply not a monotheist if you believe it. Either God is one, or He isn't.

This is not up for debate, repent and cleanse your heart, brethren.

Attached: a monk at prayer_jferrer y pallejà_1846-1946.jpg (2000x1485, 973K)

people who were atheists and become theist again only did it because atheism is no longer in fashion.
they want some social validation among their /pol/

/pol/ friends*

>I love Christ
>profanes his name in the same breath

Attached: images.png (239x211, 8K)

youtube.com/watch?v=D_EMG9H4prU

this is your brain on /pol/

>You can't have 3 interdependent dependent entities
You contain within your adult self your child-self and your adolescent-self. You are three distinct entities (clear physical/psychological differences between each) yet one being.
To visualize this easiest, try one of those cliche "what would you say to your 15 year old self" thought-exercises, and see how much you differ from him.

This example is hampered by the fact that the one God is unaffected by time. He's eternal and everlasting.

As much as I hate poltards from /r/thedonald and right wingers in general (or linear-tards in general) if you are politically correct you do NOT belong on places like Yea Forums.

>This example is hampered by the fact that the one God is unaffected by time. He's eternal and everlasting.
It has many flaws, and on the face of it, I guess it sounds naive and simplistic. Was just trying to show that imagining a trinity (of three interdependent entities) isn't impossible.
Another comparison (flawed again of course) would be Water, which can be liquid, gaseous and solid - all different states of it, varying in properties, but the same thing.

If all entities of the trinity are just one being, then there's no point in worshipping them seperately, is there? If you agree that there is only one God, why not worship Him as one, knowing He encompasses all of being anyways?

Attached: der_einsame_baum_kaspar_david_friedrich.jpg (3543x2789, 3.56M)

By worshiping one you worship all three and the reversal.

So you agree it's redundant

Attached: holzfaeller-2.jpg (514x600, 50K)

Worshiping isn't redundant, regardless of which manifestation of the Godhead you choose to address in a particular prayer.
No matter where you drink from the stream, even if the places are different, it's the same water.

If we had a christian board I would ask to sticky this post.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_sin

enjoy the hot place, user

repent

people typically worship "the Lord" which means God, or Jesus, and/or the Holy Spirit. there really isn't any distinction in practice. people glorify God in church, not any specific person of the trinity.

based

the CPU, hard drive, and motherboard can all be said to be the computer itself, since each takes care of some function that defines its basic functions. the CPU performs all operations, the hard drive stores those operations and houses the OS, and the motherboard facilitates communication between components and houses the BIOS. all three are the computer, yet not one is the same as another
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, similarly, are all such fundamental aspects of God that they basically are God themselves, but they are still not the same, as they each express themselves in different manners and in different contexts
that said, many trinitarians take it too far and will go to hell for polytheism, but as long as you think of each as a separate aspect of the same existence, then you remain monotheist and therefore non-heretical

Except each of those parts are not a complete system without the others, or their at least less powerful on their own. To apply that to the trinity would imply each on its own is not God.

Can someone explain where this "god judges you" retardation came from?

vengeance is mine, saith the lord. look it up.

It's one of the most efficient ways of enforcing a moral system

It comes from the exoteric understanding of Judaism, it appears again in the book of Revelations in the New Testament but people neglect God's mercy and the personal, noetic, and spiritual nature of sin, and instead focus on the moralistic and legalistic.

As points out, this has been exploited throughout history by the ruling classes in order to encourage or discourage certain behavior.

dum dum read Romans. the divine right of kings is established by God and their appointees are effectors of providence. next time youre arrested for driving high on the ganj be sure to thank the officer for taking you off the road and ensuring the safety of the rest of society.

What? God tells us whats wrong and whats right, He blesses us with a soul and a moral compass, we are made in His image, yet we don't have to undergo His omniscient judgement? Is this what you are implying? Of course He judges you.

I am the closest being to the Second Coming of Christ you're gonna find, bud.

>implying that God can exist unwhole
take the CPU out of the computer, and it stops working. remove the Father from the trinity, and God no longer exists. there is no issue

I don't need to believe in meaning of life, let alone be pure, to take "What would Jesus do?" as a zeroth approximation to make decisions.

Jesus is like Batman if he'd have good mood.

Attached: 1559760592124.jpg (640x960, 62K)

Notice I how I used the words "focus" and "neglect". It's not that there's no judgement, but one of many possible heresies is to focus almost solely on judgement.

People really get carried away on the judgement issue wrt doctrinal issues that are unique to their branch of Christianity. A lot of these problems and the overly amplified concern with them is born from a facile understanding of both The Law as delivered to Moses and the teachings of Christ, at worst it is a satanic tool to dilute the greater Christian message and divide people.

>I am the closest being to the Second Coming of Christ you're gonna find, bud.
ok fren bye bye i'll see you from heaven

Attached: pepedemon.jpg (250x242, 12K)

Why would God have this anthropomorphic trait of "judgement"? What is judgement to God if He's all that exists?

So each part of the trinity is not fully God and therefore not equal to God

It's called multiplicity you fucking retard, how do you think you "exist"? Are Christians really this ignorant about the metaphysics of their own religion?

I'm not Christian
In the standard view of the trinity each member is equal to God, however you're implying that's not the case and only the trinity as a whole is equal to God.

>In the standard view of the trinity each member is equal to God

They are. God is Omnipotent and Omnipresent, He is Everything and Anything and Nothing at the same time. However for anything to "be" there has to be differentiation. God transcends paradox (duality).