/lit/ - Literature

Even if they had their own board they wouldn't leave. The sticky says /his/ is for discussing religion, yet they are still here. they have their little outposts on other chans and yet they are still here. Proselytizing religions won't leave you alone (and i think people who do so with the pure intention are actually very kind people and worth a great deal of respect. I'm not sure how many on /lit/ would fit this description though), worse yet when many have adopted their religion as an identity and feel the need to prove it (to themselves?) at every opportunity. They feel the need to claim a space and monopolize discourse to create hegemonic agreement—as the so common refrain goes, /lit/ is a christian board!. But it seems even non-proselytizing religions feel the need to posture and boast, which is why i'm starting to think it has more to do with identity than doctrinal teaching. perhaps you can't blame people for wanting to discuss things that are very important to them, but the actions of people here always seems so petty and an embarrassment to the great traditions they ostensibly represent. this post really went nowhere, my apologies to anyone who read it.

/lit/ is a Christian board

Can anyone explain to me how I can come to believe in God? Why is it reasonable for me to believe in God?
I understand that it may be reasonable for you to believe in God because of your own personal experiences with him. I had some of those as well in childhood when I was deeply religious and felt the touch of God, but later on I've come to accept different explanations of my experiences.
Also please don't just point to an author: I will not read them if that's all you do. Please give the main crux of their argument.
Also note that I am not talking about a general idea of God, a first mover. Rather I am interested in a concrete, personal God. The one like, for example, in the Bible, or in islam.

As a side note, I am not trying to proselytize anyone here into atheism. I am an atheist as a result of my own personal experience but I believe it can and often is perfectly reasonable and logical for another person to be a christian.

Thanks for your attention.

>>15216829
>Can anyone explain to me how I can come to believe in God?
The path is different for all people, but nobody comes to the true God without humility and an honest desire to know him. It seems like you're already on the path. I myself went through a long path of first seeing the illogical nature of various atheism-influenced views, and then finally accepting that some sort of impersonal God might exist after all but still denied Christ and saw Christianity as 'beneath me' like most 'intellectual types' do, then I saw that literally everyone denying Christ essentially falls into either the pagan-relativist or judaic-pharisee category and understood that it was all folly, prayed for the first time since childhood, read the Gospel, went to church and just couldn't deny it anymore.
>Why is it reasonable for me to believe in God?
Because it's not reasonable to deny him and your own experience of him and things directly pertaining to him. It's completely unreasonable and self-contradictory to doubt truth, love, free will, design/purpose, logic and language as all atheists inevitably end up doing if they're 'intelligent' enough and go through with thinking on these topics in any depth. God knows us very well and shows perfectly all over the world what kind of people reject God in exchange for transient and ever-evolving 'knowledge' or being perceived as 'wise' in this world.

18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”
20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

>Rather I am interested in a concrete, personal God.
God bless, anon. You're already closer to the truth than you realize.

>>15216659
a metaphysics board dedicated to all the philosophical and religious shit that gets posted across /lit/, /his/ and /sci/ would be okay but at the same time I think having a dedicated board would kinda ruin the 'novelty' of it I guess, make it less interesting. Lots of philosophy and religion are written in text so in that way it makes sense to discuss them and their ideas here. Lainchan is pretty much already what I described and I don't think it has the same quality or value. I parse through mounds of shit threads here to find diamonds and I like it compared to the steady flow of pretty decent/good/average content found on stricter boards and chans etc.

bump.

>Create a religion and philosophy bored
>Remove the "& humanities" from /his/
>Actually enforce the changes by banning philosophy or religion memers when they rear their ugly heads outside of the new containment bored

>>15216829

The best logical reasons are a high and difficult road, necessarily leading through the God of the Philosophers, though the God of the Philosophers leads one to the God of the Bible eventually.

From what you say about 'different explanations' of your experiences, it is important to bear in mind that God as an explanation of experience is not in competition with a physical and psychological explanation. As the First Cause who sustains and intends all things, even the physical and psychological mechanisms in us, insofar as such experiences tell us of him, they cannot be wholly wrong or unintended. Psychological and mechanical explanations do not touch the absolute metaphysical first principles of things, so you are shortchanging yourself if you discount your religious experiences purely on those grounds.

Philosophy can tell us that the One God exists, and that he knows and loves us: finite, qualified being, such as we have, is intrinsically an approximation and derivation of infinite, unqualified reality, which as our cause possessed our being in himself before he created us, hence, understands us, wills us and loves us. The One God of the philosophers is not an impersonal Mover (even Aristotle's Prime Mover was never impersonal), but a loving Creator who even now loves us into being.

As human beings, and rational knowers ourselves, our natural desire is to know and love our first principle, the Creator.Yet given our finitude, we are in ourselves incapable of returning this love in the way we ought. This implies that God has made us for a closer union than we can accomplish without his self-disclosure, which in turn implies a special self-revelation. It is in accord with the rational disposition, then, to expect a special self-disclosure from an intelligent, loving (and therefore, personal) God- an interpersonal self-naming in history rather than a mere inference of human understanding. More than that, to be fully unified with us, he has to permanently bridge the infinite gap between finite and infinite nature, without ceasing to be either. This is the very Christian doctrine of the Incarnation, which fulfils the intrinsic hope of reason (i.e., to know and love God) yet is beyond the power of reason to command.

So it is the God of Christian revelation whom you should reasonably hope to meet, and the God who, as the object of the very hope God has created in you, is in your desire to know him is already drawing you to himself. But respond to it, and far from betraying reason, you will fulfil its highest conceivable ambition.

>>15216829
Unironically fideism

>>15217172
Daily reminder that you don't need to subscribe to any kike cult to believe in God and that christkikes were so buttblasted about the superiority of neoplatonists they had to shut their academies down and later integrated neoplatonism into their religion out of sheer spiritual cuckoldry.

>>15216659
Will 4chan birth a new generation of young christians ?

>>15216659
I've been asking for it for years. You have to convince the faggots on /qa/ who are a bunch of fedora tipping retards that say religion belongs on /x/ (Which is full of schizo nonsense, spooky posting and occult evil).

>>15218220
Kike
On
A
Stick

There's no literature without religion.
Go back.

>>15218248
Get a load of this fucking moron! He's so far deep into the jewish cult he isn't even aware pre-christians wrote the best literature.

>>15218258
What's wrong? Your Christian bashing thread got completely ignored? What a shame.

>>15218258
Pre christians were religious

>>15218220
No, Jewish converts, but the kind that combine it with some notional buddhism.

>>15218265
>everyone hates christcucks and sees them as a plague around here
>HURRRRR IT'S JUST ONE GUY
And he's a schizo too

>>15218266
Not according to christards.

>>15218258
Where'd I say I was Christian?

>>15218213

Neoplatonism without the special revelation of God's concrete self-disclosure in history is a spiritual dead end. With revelation, Neoplatonism becomes a useful intellectual ornament for the soul, so it is no surprise that Christians made use of it.

>>15218286
You literally just used that same image to start another thread.

>>15218296
Retarded claim that only a low iq christcuck would make

>>15218301
>Neoplatonism without the special revelation of God's concrete self-disclosure in history is a spiritual dead end.
Cucktianity without platonism is plain jewish mysticism. It's the greeks who made it what is today not a bunch of illiterate sand kikes.
>>15218306
Ask your kike god YAHWEH to provide valid evidence.

>>15218339
Cringe

>>15218343
Cope, nigger lover.

>>15218363
That's equally cringe but not for the reasons you would assume

>>15218248
There is literature without your kike on a stick religion though.

>>15218363
Why wouldn't the true religion include all races? God created them didn't he? Orthodox Christianity is composed of ethnic churches which maintain their distinct ethnicity, even though the body of the church itself is one.

>>15218339

Imagine thinking a bunch of sterile intellectuals and mystics could get anywhere without the faith, hope and love which is the lifeblood of the Church. Christianity without Platonism is still the religion of Christ, the incarnate God who triumphed over death. All the urgency and animating vigour and aspiration to put all things under his feet which unite high and low alike come from the person and work of Christ, not the speculations of the philosophers. That is why the schools were conquered, and their ideas enslaved to the Messiah's cause.

Next to that power and ever-living vigour, nothing in the pagan world could stand. Pitiful Julian tried to find a vigour to oppose it in the Pagan philosphers and cults, and could find nothing. The myopic racialist who would reject the faith of Christ on the basis that Christ was of a different tribe signs his own tribe's death warrant. The superior, sustained vigour of the children of Abraham will wash his vain speculations and blood cults away. The only real choice is between the Christian faith that Europe made its own, and destruction.

>>15218506
Why would the true religion destroy national identities with race mixing?

>>15218519
Plato reached enlightenment without a shred of knowledge about magic kikes and you have never read his works like the rest of the illiterate christkikes on this board. Get the fuck out and take your kike cult with you.

>>15218526
Real churches don't support that at all.

>>15218540
Plato didn't reach the enlightenment he sought, even if he was head and shoulders above the rest of the pagan rabble. He looked for the Good Itself and saw only an infinite distance which he tried to bridge with vain myths and mysticism. Those who took up his project had nothing to show for it but gnostic cults and sterile academies. It was the coming of Christ which his philosophy truly awaited, the definitive realisation of the infinite in the finite. Imagine trying to oppose the fulfilment of all man's hope with futile racial hatred. You don't even rise to the better class of pagan.

>>15218526

>>15218597
>Those who took up his project had nothing to show for it but gnostic cults
They literally bashed gnostics you dumb nigger
>It was the coming of Christ which his philosophy truly awaited
Yeah the philosophy of turning your other butt cheek to the rapist who fucked your daughter.
>racial hatred
Doesn't exist

>>15218586
Wait until some christcuck from a slightly different denomination calls you a heretic and cites that we're all one in christ

>>15218622
Nice try schlomo

>>15218120
A good quote to go with your post.

"The intellectual arguments for the existence of God are necessarily of a somewhat dry and speculative nature … The arguments will prove that God exists, but they will not present God vividly as a real living person, felt to be existing and intimately present, as an imposing reality exercising, so to speak, the magnetism of personality on the soul … Man does not live by pure intellect alone. What he longs for, what he is influenced by, is concrete reality Now this is precisely the purpose of the religious instinct—to seize on the dry, cold, abstract truth of the intellect, and to make it concrete; to clothe the dry bones with flesh, and warm the cold speculative idea till its object is vividly realized as a present and imposing thing. It is only when this happens that God will become in practical effect a Being to be reckoned with, and to be entered into communion with as the object of religious worship and moral service". ~ Ernest Hull, God, Man, and Religion

Please just leave this board and use the /Christian/ board on 8kun if all you do is make religious posts.

>>15218000
this

>>15218634
This isn't a psyop or whatever you schizo /pol/fags think it is. Go back.
>>>/pol/