In continuation of In this thread, we discuss the Bible: the number one best selling book in the world year after year.
Please be civil.
Opening question:
If you had in your possession a specimen of saleable, collectible pornography, would you either sell it and donate the money to an appropriate charity, or cast it into the fire as a righteous act of damnatio memoriæ?
Other urls found in this thread:
churchlatin.com
anopenorthodoxy.wordpress.com
anopenorthodoxy.wordpress.com
anopenorthodoxy.wordpress.com
anopenorthodoxy.wordpress.com
twitter.com
QOTT: Sell it.
Actual Response: I just started reading the Bible cover-to-cover for the first time. Made it through Genesis so far and holy good goddamn was that a lot.
why doesn't this heavenly fucker show himself so we know we aren't just talking to ourselves
Destroy it, the poor will always be there.
It's happens all the time.
Is this the GOAT interlinear Bible? I was disappointed when I got my interlinear NT to find out they rearranged the Greek to fit the ESV English translation rather than give you the Greek NT as it was.
>why doesn't this heavenly fucker show himself
He did.
Based OP, I have that book. It's good to have the source text for looking up passages, many times English translations are very disappointing.
>would you either sell it and donate the money to an appropriate charity, or cast it into the fire as a righteous act of damnatio memoriæ?
Destroy it and commit a charitable act from my own pocket. Selling it is out of the question, one does not do good by becoming a distributor of pornography.
It's pretty good I think.
Burn it just like I do any "bible" (non KJB) to prevent it from corrupting others with its Satanic filth.
people have a mountain of evidence that the new testament is reliable but when you show them that the kingdom of david is a myth made to build up heebs' morale under babylonian captivity they're speechless
the NT could be writen by Jesus himself but it won't make christianity true, and if the OT is mythology christianity is false for sure
ok bart ehrman
I hate him with a passion
keep going user. read Exodus then you can take a break to skip ahead to the gospels. you don't have to read the entire book in order.
I discovered and read yesterday the bit about incest, loved it
are there any fanarts or something
and it's just the surface; check Genesis 5 genealogy with the meaning of the names; there's tons of prophecy and prefigurations everywhere in the OT.
As puts it, a jump to the NT wouldn't be bad; i'd recommend starting with it even. If you might be in need of an order: Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts, John, Epistles, Revelation, OT in order.
you could swap the Gospels around; read Luke with Acts because he wrote both, i prefer the order i listed.
found one, what a great painting
Anyone else waiting for them to come out and admit it's all a giant Satanic plot? I feel like we've never been closer to prophecy/collapse and it's just a straight slope downwards.
>them
whom?
>it's all a plot
what is?
Reprobates: could easily classify them as bankers, politicians, ceos, generic satanists,
The plot to destabilize the world and institute a totalitarian dystopia because jews feel unsafe in ethnically whole countries. (likely just pure Satanic intentions though)
I'm talking about the destruction of food production, energy crisis, vaccinations, free speech, the whole schizo 9 yards. Feels like it is setting itself up to mirror Revelations almost perfectly.
I've been reading up on various infrastructure reports and it's going to be a global collapse in terms of famine and disease, unless there's a magic red fixit button hiding somewhere
I still don't get who the other people in the world are, when Cain goes off
oh them.
yeah u right.
>you WILL read the Book of Proverbs
>you WILL keep its commands in your heart
>you WILL become wise
>you WILL make your parents proud
>you WILL have a lovely wife and lots of children
>you WILL prosper
>you WILL die peacefully in your bed surrounded by your loving family
They’re daughters of Adam. The Bible is clear that all of humankind descends from Adam. It doesn’t say Cain found anyone new there.
Genesis 5:4
Do you think God would ever do the whole creation experiment again? We wrap up our salvation thing and a few eternities go by and God says "hey maybe if we did it again the first thing the woman does won't be the single thing I told her not to do?"
Kinda funny to think about.
>you WILL thank God for it in your deathbed
>you WILL be with Christ in heaven in absolute perfect happiness
also, if anyone might not know, wisdom in proverbs is Christ.
>wisdom in proverbs is Christ.
Source for this? Or did you make it up?
The Church Fathers have taught this over a millennia ago. Read Proverbs 9, what does it say?—Wisdom offers people bread and wine, among other things. A clear prefiguration of the Eucharist. In Proverbs 8 the figure of Wisdom is said to be an architect of the creation along with God, and this is entirely consistent with John 1, where nothing was created apart from the Word of God. This becomes even clearer in deuterocanonical texts like the Wisdom of Solomon were Wisdom is described as being the image of God’s goodness, and is only-begotten (monogenes), etc. Also clear in Ephesians 3:10-11, among other places
>so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places. This was according to the eternal purpose that he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord,
I have pondered this as well. I have no Biblical foundation for this, but I wouldn’t be surprised if God had done this entire process countless times.
i refrained from replying to the other one, but the whole idea of that is asinine.
it's omnipotence without omniscience.
or, to be comical, it's basically what an user would do with power.
I didn’t mean recreating another world explicitly to avoid the Fall. God knew that was going to happen, obviously, and it was part of His plan for the world that that occur. What I was saying was that it would not surprise me if God had created countless myriads of worlds and essentially ran the same process over and over again, simply to draw more people to Himself. Whether a Fall would happen every time or not, who knows.
yes, and as said, that presupposes something bad about God. in that idea of "more people" for example, vanity.
thanks user
besides the Bible, what's the best book I can read that gives an overview of Christianity?
Can it not be said that God wills as many to be saved as possible and wishes to share his love with as many as He can? It’s not hard to think that this may be the purpose of the entire creation
>besides the Bible, what's the best book I can read that gives an overview of Christianity?
Catechism of the Catholic Church is what you're asking for. And maybe the Didache if you wanted a glance at the beginnings of the church.
The Light of Christ by Thomas Joseph White is a very good overview. Introduction to Christianity by Benedict XVI is good too.
For the history of Christian doctrine can't go wrong with Jaroslav Pelikan's 5 volume series.
>besides the Bible
Enjoy being fooled into false beliefs by Satan.
You guys raided our Nietzsche thread so I am returning the favour. Have a passage from the Genealogy of Morals:
(1/2)
Nothing that has been done on earth against ‘the noble’, ‘the mighty’, ‘the masters’ and ‘the rulers’, is worth mentioning compared with what the Jews have done against them: the Jews, that priestly people, which in the last resort was able to gain satisfaction from its enemies and conquerors only through a radical revaluation of their values, that is, through an act of the most deliberate revenge [durch einen Akt der geistigsten Rache]. Only this was fitting for a priestly people with the most entrenched priestly vengefulness. It was the Jews who, rejecting the aristocratic value equation (good = noble = powerful = beautiful = happy = blessed) ventured, with awe-inspiring consistency, to bring about a revesal and held it in the teeth of the most unfathomable hatred (the hatred of the powerless), saying: ‘Only those who suffer are good, only the poor, the powerless, the lowly are good; the suffering, the deprived, the sick, the ugly, are the only pious people, the only ones saved, salvation is for them alone, whereas you rich, the noble and powerful, you are eternally wicked, cruel, lustful, insatiate, godless, you will also be eternally wretched, cursed and damned!’ . . . We know who became heir to this Jewish revaluation . . . With regard to the huge and incalculably disastrous initiative taken by the Jews with this most fundamental of all declarations of war, I recall the words I wrote on another occasion (Beyond Good and Evil, section 195) 21 – namely, that the slaves’ revolt in morality begins with the Jews: a revolt which has two thousand years of history behind it and which has only been lost sight of because – it was victorious . . .
(2/2)
This Jesus of Nazareth, as the embodiment of the gospel of love, this ‘redeemer’ bringing salvation and victory to the poor, the sick, to sinners – was he not seduction in its most sinister and irresistible form, seduction and the circuitous route to just those very Jewish values and innovative ideals? Did Israel not reach the pinnacle of her sublime vengefulness via this very ‘redeemer’, this apparent opponent of and disperser of Israel? Is it not part of a secret black art of a truly grand politics of revenge, a far sighted, subterranean revenge, slow to grip and calculating, that Israel had to denounce her actual instrument of revenge before all the world as a mortal enemy and nail him to the cross so that ‘all the world’, namely all Israel’s enemies, could safely nibble at this bait? And could anyone, on the other hand, using all the ingenuity of his intellect, think up a more dangerous bait? Something to equal the enticing, intoxicating, benumbing, corrupting power of that symbol of the ‘holy cross’, to equal that horrible paradox of a ‘God on the Cross’, to equal that mystery of an unthinkable final act of extreme cruelty and self- crucifixion of God for the salvation of mankind? . . . At least it is certain that sub hoc signo Israel, with its revenge and revaluation of all former values, has triumphed repeatedly over all other ideals, all nobler ideals. – –
Enjoy moralising your weakness and misfortune you pathetic weasels.
Adamkind descends from Adam. it definitely isn't clear that humankind does
>midwit edgelord takes
Enjoy succumbing to the trap set by pride of intellect floating in vapors.
fwiw Nietzsche would find your neo-pagan larping cringe and disgusting. To Nietzsche you'd be far closer to the Last Man than the Overman.
Watched a show about the jefferson bible. For those that don't know, Thomas jefferson literally cut verses out of the Bible relating to Jesus' morality and pasted them in a separate book
He felt Jesus' message had been corrupted by others so he stripped away the "super natural elements" ie: miracles, angels, the resurrection, etc. among other things
Anyway, I am curious as to how you all view this. I find it odd that one would strip away the resurrection but I suppose it would go in that camp of those who think Jesus' message was twisted in the gospels and the epistles
If anyone is interested in old fashioned Vulgates, these guys make a reproduction of a legendary version from 120 years ago. It sells out quickly and is currently in stock.
churchlatin.com
Jesus entire morality was based around eschewing this world in favor of the next. I don't understand how his ethical teachings could be of any use for someone who denies the spiritual nature of man.
>neo-pagan
Neo-pagan? What gave you that impression? Oh wait, I forgot, Christcucks can never defend their own religion so resort to criticising paganism regardless of whether their opponent is pagan or not for they have no other strategies to resort to.
I'm just surprised you were assblasted enough by us dumb Christcucks and our fag religion to come post
>2
>lmao
snippets of Neetcha and act like it was an impressive revenge for uh "raiding" your thread.
I'm sure the past 1,000 years of your Christian ancestors are so impressed you stuck it to us.
>Neo-pagan? What gave you that impression?
They're the usual types who come around here spouting "muh neetch", "muh jew on a stick", "muh christcucks", "muh slave morality". It don't really matter since you're equally cringe and a child with an identity crisis.
Nietzsche by his own admission would not want to live in any society where his philosophy reigned dominant so I fail to see any merit to his thought.
Yeah that's something I dont understand either but then it is in vain to try and understand scripture without the Holy Spirit anyway so when trying to be the "natural man" as Paul describes you will miss what is of the Spirit
He took it to a serious level. He had Latin Greek French and English translations in his composition. It ends evidently with Jesus being buried
>surely having a bible general will keep the proselytizing larp-trolls out of other threads on the board
The oddity of Nietzsche’s Christ is how close he comes to a cliché on the one hand and how remote he seems from the texts from which his picture is extracted on the other: he appears in The Anti-Christ as a sort of outlandish hybrid between a fin de siècle Parisian decadent, nourished on absinthe and opium, and an autistic child. The implausibility is difficult to exaggerate; the fiction is so thoroughly polemical that all proportion and narrative continuity is lost – an imaginative failure, as I have said. It would seem that, for Nietzsche, the figure of the Gospels remained to the end indomitable: in Christ he encountered a restive, alien, and intractable quality that had to be put at a distance by a combination of invective and extravagant psychological speculation. Admittedly, to deem The Anti-Christ an artistic failure is an entirely aesthetic evaluation, but in regard to Nietzsche nothing could be more pertinent. In this work, finally, the form of Christ remains rhetorically untouched (which is what is at issue for Nietzsche: he is not like Harnack, deluded that he can retrieve something of Christ’s historical substance as an objective quantity). To Nietzsche, whose limited psychological phenomenology can accommodate nothing that does not obey the simple taxonomy of active and reactive, Christ can be grasped only as withdrawal, dissolution, spindrift evaporating at the verge of the great ocean of violent energy that is the cosmos; it is inconceivable to him that the lamb brought to slaughter could be also the lion of Judah.
- David Bentley Hart, the Beauty of the Infinite
This is in the same vein as the /pol/ - Yea Forums sperg war, and can be summed up that since television is inherently a political tool as much as it is a recreational outlet, then the observations of blah blah blah are valid and the conversations are relevant.
Having the Bible general may allow an outlet for dedicated religious conversation, but someone is equally justified to speak as a religious person on other subject matter. Just like a poltard is justified to speak about TV programs and how his worldview relates to them.
I personally don't have an issue with cross-thread or even cross-board conversations but I can understand how it might be frustrating. Hopefully your evangelists were at least tolerable and not full retard, otherwise you have my sympathy.
Again, there is little but force of rhetoric behind Nietzsche’s constant reversion to a pagan vision of the world as perpetual agon, a terrible collusion of chaos and order, which is shaped and controlled through the judicious deployment of various powers, such as “reason” or “the state,” or (as is the case with Nietzsche) merely affirmed as wasteful but indestructible creativity. Nietzsche is a pure metaphysician insofar as he cannot endure the “irrational” idea of a freely creative and utterly transcendent love; he thirsts for the soothing fatalism of “necessity.” Thus he merely repeats the wisdom of totality, how redoubled and reinvigorated by a critique internal to itself: like Dionysus, totality rends itself apart to give itself new birth; the limbs of Parmenides are reassembled in the form of Heracleitos. If, however, the language of Christ’s evangel is taken seriously, for even a moment, a certain salutary trembling must pass through the edifice of totality: it is irreconcilably subversive of all the values of antique virtue and public philosophy, whether guarded by Apollo or animated by Dionysus; it makes every claim to power and to rights not only provisional, not only false, but quite simply absurd. Christians claim that the beauty that appears in Christ, contrary to all judicious taste, abides with and in the poor, the godforsaken, the forgotten, and the lowly, not simply as a sweetening of their lot with bootless sentimentality, or because Christianity cherishes life only when it is weak, perishing, and uncomely, but because Christ – who is the truth of being – indwelling among and embracing these “slaves,” shows them to be luminously beautiful.
...
Finally, of course, as I have repeatedly insisted, it is taste, rather than historical evidence, that must dictate whether one elects to see Christ as a creator of values or as an impotent decadent. Again, it is Nietzsche’s aesthetic evaluation – I this case his preference for the form and allure of noble values over Christ’s gospel of love – that remains unassailable. The metaphysical aspects of his critique, which continually float to the surface wherever they are denied, are embarrassing if regarded as anything other than facets of an imaginative narrative, an attempt at a more compelling story, whose appeal is rhetorical, whose logic is figurative, and whose foundation is none. Nietzsche’s disdain does not follow from the force of his reasoning; it is that force.
>There are people with the last name Cain
Why?
The four parts of DBHs critique of Nietzsche if anyone wants to read them in full
anopenorthodoxy.wordpress.com
anopenorthodoxy.wordpress.com
anopenorthodoxy.wordpress.com
anopenorthodoxy.wordpress.com
"Yes I would be happy to bear the same surname as the guy who pissed God off and was cursed to the ends of the earth"
This is like when muslims name their kid Mohammed or jews name their kids Satan isn't it
Or cat ladies go home to the entire cast of game of thrones
hey thanks man, I just wish I was smart enough to appreciate that big brain style of writing. Still, I'll give them a look
Adam and Eve aren't the first humans, just the first Christians
Holy shit you've had some bad recommendations
>read the liturgy of a church that existed nearly 2000 years ago if you want to understand Christianity
Try Mere Christianity by CS Lewis.
If you are going to reference the anointing of Jesus, do it right. Jesus would have consumed the porn in this example. He didn't set the oils on fire.
>comparing anointing to literal pornography
come on.
no, first humans.
yes. Mere Christianity is an amazing read.
>there are creationists ITT
>retard read nietzshe in english instead of original german
dumb fuck