A one paragraph proof for Christianity

[Anonymous No.21313018]

The purpose of the below paragraph is to prove Christianity.

We start with the true blank of discourse, where before entering into small talk, rational discourse, mathematic proves, violence, painting, and other forms of communication and I ask you which of these is rational to choose? Should I cite papers or kill you? Should I show you St. Peter's Basilica or donate to the poor? The Buddhist answers that all and none are equally rational whereas the Gospel answers how they pertain to one another. In this central node of blankness, before going into anything resembling logic, violence, emotions, or anything of that sort where these metaphysical domains do not talk to one another, this center node, i.e. the space between algebra and geometry, is only filled via Jesus Christ's Gospel and is the blank left from the Fall. He does this by showing that the logic of this central place, I call the soulscape, is totally structured with unlimited compassion and charity and that all other metaphysical domains genuflect to that. Out of the abundance of the heart speaketh the mouth.

[Anonymous No.21313227]

>>21313018
> A one paragraph proof for why OP belongs on
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.21313241]

>>21313018
i dont get it

[Anonymous No.21313586]

>>21313227
lol i do not consent the framework of insults
>>21313241
Let's say I want to convince you to buy a pen from me. I can A) put a gun to your head and force you to, B) sell you with appealing to your emotions, and but not limited to C) argue with you rationally for it. Which of this is rationally correct when we have already established that rationality is a subset of these options? When you are thinking in terms of value system trade-offs you need the Gospel.

[Anonymous No.21313591]

>>21313586
>Which of this is rationally correct
All of them are rationally "correct". What do you mean by "correct", anyway? They all would work

[Anonymous No.21313597]

>>21313018
Your schizo rambling does not make any sense whatsoever and you are not proving anything to anyone

[Anonymous No.21313606]

>>21313018
What the bloody hell kind of nonsensical word puzzle have you spawned out of your grey matter there anon?

[Anonymous No.21313657]

>>21313591
You have then shown that violence is equal to rationality in the eyes of pen selling and thus the problem of pen seeling outweighed moral considerations.
>>21313597
>>21313606
does this >>21313586 help?

[Anonymous No.21313669]

>>21313018
>the space between algebra and geometry, is only filled via Jesus Christ's Gospel
A genuine article of schizobabble, with no mutual referent about which you and I can communicate. Whatever you mean by those terms is so idiosyncatic and removed from what they are understood to mean that you might as well be engaged in glossolalia, which only impressed ancient Levantine peasants.

[Anonymous No.21313671]

>>21313586
(A) is rationally correct, since that's the only one that would actually get me to buy the pen.

[Anonymous No.21313688]

>>21313669
This. It seems like youre giving some very novel connotations to the terms youre using and are thereby unengageable. Language rests on a mutual agreement of definitions

[Anonymous No.21313703]

>>21313669
Human metaphysical categories rely on self-referential non-contradictions that do not logically relate. Said otherwise, algebra can never become geometry and geometry cannot become algebra because of our fallen state but they are both valid in the same sense that logic and emotions are separate because of our fall but in the perfect, and Christ-redeemed sense, are one.

[Anonymous No.21313712]

>>21313018
One picture to refute Christianity.

Whatever you have to say after this doesn’t matter.

[Anonymous No.21313715]

>>21313703
So I already need to believe in Christian dogma (fall, redemption through Christ) to believe in your argument for Christianity being true? Do you realize how stupid that sounds to anyone who doesn't already agree with you?

[Anonymous No.21313721]

>>21313712
inb4 OP says he's orthodox, since they basically do the same thing but with mummified slavic body parts

[Anonymous No.21313724]

>>21313018

>>21313586

Doesn't follow

[Anonymous No.21313754]

>>21313715
No. You simply will not be able to properly weigh and exchange the different metaphysical tools we have. It isn't a choice so much as a fact.
>>21313724
See above.
>>21313721
Roman Catholic
>>21313712
If this upsets you then you probably are a very insecure person who is to weak to see their own weakness and has the image of a juvenile masculinity as their only sense of goodness.

[Anonymous No.21313762]

OP are you perhaps trying to say something like "The heart/emotions are the real seat and guide of our decisions.. the rational mind is the servant of the heart. Christ was the supreme empath and gatekeeper of this knowledge, and should be considered a valuable source of wisdom" ?? Something like that? I wouldnt disagree. Im not christian either. He was a proper heart sage.

[Anonymous No.21313771]

No one is impressed by your atheism.
Going to church isn’t about god or heaven, it’s about the fish frys.
Lonely? Church provides you with people who feel duty bound to *include* you in the community. You can find stability and meaning.
It’s great. Give it a shot.

[Anonymous No.21313774]

>>21313762
>>21313771
wut

[Anonymous No.21313779]

>>21313762
Obviously but I'm not trying to interpret someone's claims about the world like it's fucking dream logic. You can read meaning into anything if you want to.

[Anonymous No.21313799]

>>21313754
>You simply will not be able to properly weigh and exchange the different metaphysical tools we have. It isn't a choice so much as a fact.
Again this is just more schizobabble sans referents. What do you mean by "metaphysical tools"? If you are insisting that it is a "fact" these require belief in Christianity, and that these same tools then prove Christianity, you are literally babbling. I could just as well say "the ship's cat is the ship's captain" while staring at a commercial airliner and have made just as much sense.

[Anonymous No.21313805]

>>21313799
Now I want to read a book about a Captain that takes telepathic orders from a cat on his shoulder

[Anonymous No.21313810]

Jesus ate food and drank wine with people who needed but didn't deserve divine purpose (You).

[Anonymous No.21313816]

>>21313805
Yeah I've still been thinking about this. It might actually be a good metaphor for how any organization is only as good as its ability to motivate, e.g. have a cute mascot that people emotionally attach to

[Anonymous No.21313828]

>>21313754
Even if your argument wasn't complete nonsense, why would christianity be the answer ? why not any other religion?

[Anonymous No.21313839]

>>21313018
Stfu, icchantika. I'd sit over your corpse.

[Anonymous No.21313843]

>>21313018
I really want my minute back from reading this incoherent schizo nonsense. Genuinely thought you were going to have something interesting to say.

[Anonymous No.21314091]

>>21313018
>rational to choose

Why would that matter? Is Reason more powerful than your god? Is Reason your god, and if so, why do we need revelation, then?

[Anonymous No.21314296]

>>21313799
>"metaphysical tools"
Basically forms in which you can communicate in different domains. For example, communicating the sky is red in poetry versus the sky's actual wavelength versus the sky's HEX code are all different domains of correct but what is different about them in the sense of satisfying metaphors, correct physics assumptions, and correct computational methods are totally disharmonious from one another despite the realness of red.
>>21313810
Okay
>>21313828
The moment of inflection between these metaphysical tools is only navigated via how Christ speaks. Examples of the below:
>27 Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you.
>“He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.”
+
>whoever is not against us is for us.
As well as:
>But he said to them, “My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it.”
+
>27And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. 28But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.
The idea of holding these two statements simultaneously and seeing the true truth at the middle of them is the core meaning of "But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing." This is also why the eucharist is core whereby:
>Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing?
Is finally most perfectly shown against the parable of the wedding feast (being dressed properly) and the eucharist, that is that Christ tells us to be indifferent to what we eat yet the core truth of the religion is the eucharist. It is in this middle ground that all truth resides and thus why the Church is all things to all.

[Anonymous No.21314303]

>>21313839
>demon from demonology
I am overjoyed.
>>21313843
It is odd to me that this is not easily understandable - and I don't mean that as an attack or veiled insult, just genuinely confused.
>>21314091
>Is Reason more powerful than your god? Is Reason your god, and if so, why do we need revelation, then?
Reason is something that another thing that is rational yet not reason can isolate and discuss and that thing is where Truth and faith is and how the Gospel speaks.

[Anonymous No.21314315]

>>21314296
>For example, communicating the sky is red in poetry versus the sky's actual wavelength versus the sky's HEX code are all different domains of correct but what is different about them in the sense of satisfying metaphors, correct physics assumptions, and correct computational methods are totally disharmonious from one another despite the realness of red.
so you are just reheating platonism

[Anonymous No.21314323]

>>21314315
Platonism is overly linguistic - this doesn't say that anything red needs to necessarily be there. Plato's Timaeus does thoroughly agree with this.

[Anonymous No.21314326]

>>21314315
In a goddamn microwave oven

[Anonymous No.21314339]

>>21314323
>Platonism is overly linguistic
said the anon larping as a theologian who could prove Christianity

[Anonymous No.21314345]

>>21314339
I don't think I disagree with your post at all :)

[Anonymous No.21314373]

>>21313018
Better argument:
>All atheists are faggots, and their art sucks
>Some pagans aren't faggots but most are, but their art is good
>Some Christians are faggots but most aren't, and their art is good (excluding protestants)
>Ergo, Christianity is true

[Anonymous No.21314380]

>>21314373
Thank you, Aristotle!

[Anonymous No.21314445]

>>21313018
Do you prefer the lofty Biblical tone of the Silmarillion or some other form of worldbuilding/document of history?

[Anonymous No.21314447]

>>21314373
>religion bans images, says it right there on the tin
>people who made art before the conversion, after some interruption, resume making art, with the aesthetic peak of this art being somewhere around the Renaissance period or after, when artists deliberately emulated pagan models, themes, etc
hmmm

[Anonymous No.21314663]

>>21314445
Haven't read Tolkien in all honesty but really like R. Scott Bakker a lot.

[Anonymous No.21314676]

Quantum mechanics, Heisenberg's uncertainty disprove religion and Christianity.

[Anonymous No.21314679]

>>21314663
>but really like R. Scott Bakker a lot.
You're into queer fantasy?

[Anonymous No.21314799]

>>21314676
The guy I talked to who did his PhD in String Theory said that physics is at the point requiring a new mathematics so that could be wrong as of now.

[Anonymous No.21314902]

>>21314447
>Ignores gothic cathedrals, medieval paintings and tapestry, and Eastern iconography
You're only proving >>21314373 point faggot

[Anonymous No.21314919]

>>21314676
I heard the opposite, that it shows the epistemic weakness of science, disproving scientism.

[Anonymous No.21315058]

>>21314902
The Mosaic religion you follow a cadet branch of nominally bans images. So it isn't the cause for them being made or being made of any quality. All of "their art" you are referring to was European art with Christianity as a particular subject. And it was made in spite of the religious scriptures calling representational art a sin, because the tradition of such European art goes back to ancient Greece. And those Greeks went to India and made Buddhist art there and historians consider those statues the first surviving examples of realistic human sculpture in Asia. It's entirely the same with Christianity, which would hardly have the same artistic output associated with it had it not been introduced to image-making Europeans.

[Anonymous No.21315079]

>>21314902
>gothic cathedrals
yes, buildings based on gothic architecture, created by the goths, who were pagans.

[Anonymous No.21315093]

>>21315079
Gothic architecture is just called gothic to distinguish it from the earlier Roman architecture. It's not particularly related to what the Goths were building in their bogs and forests prior to moving into Roman land. You could just as well call it "late medieval" architecture. And by the time said architecture is being built the Goths don't exist as a western European ethnic group. If memory serves the last few Gothic speakers lived along the Black Sea around everyone's favorite disputed territories

[Anonymous No.21315322]

>>21315058
I want to hear your take on Islamic art

[Anonymous No.21315335]

>>21315322
Well in that case they're not only obeying the ban but continuing pre-Islamic traditions of patterned/geometric art found throughout western and central Asia. But in Europe with few exceptions the ban was totally ignored.

[Anonymous No.21315931]

>>21315079
The absolute state of /lit/

[Anonymous No.21315985]

>>21315058
I said that Pagan art and Christian art were both good. The determining factor for Christianity in my irrefutable argument was that some Christians are faggots while most Christians aren't, as opposed to pagans who were and are mostly faggots.

[Anonymous No.21316005]

>>21313586
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW98pGSTvM0

[Anonymous No.21316033]

>>21313018
an uncaused first cause, God, or infinite regress, the only two possibilities of our "beginning", either way you realize that an unknown will dictates the nature of existence, in that we live off assumed constants, logic is equal to faith because nature is a miracle, and Christ is the only figure that compells you to think an unfathomable deity could be true

[Anonymous No.21316056]

>>21313754
>See above.
Doesn;t follow.

[Anonymous No.21316097]

>>21315985
Your homosocial and celibate priesthood probably begs to differ.
>>21316033
Doesn't really compel any more than the thousands of other deities. You really think because you like something that's evidence other people should agree with you?

[Anonymous No.21316181]

>>21316097
lol what other "god" dies for cosmic dust in comparison, Christ love is absoultely absurd and horrifically intense, no one comes close in sublimity, plus the only one with practical spiritual and prophetic power in this world, rest is bubble gum wrapper quick tip, good to chew then spit out

[Anonymous No.21316200]

>>21315985
You're right that leftists and trannies have hijacked Paganism in the last 30 or so years but that's no real argument against Paganism, if it is then it's a very shallow one. The problem is you're thinking of Paganism as a sort exclusive in-group, like another Abrahamic religion in other words, when it's more of an umbrella term for a variety of traditions that anyone can practise, faggot or not.

[Anonymous No.21316202]

>>21316181
>practical spiritual and prophetic power in this world
Like what? For rival example, the Taliban defeated both the USSR and the USA. Pretty impressive stuff, Allah. What's Jesus been up to lately?

[Anonymous No.21316325]

>>21316097
>some Christians are faggots while most Christians aren't
Learn to read retard.
>>21316200
I was more referring to the all-too-common acceptance of pederasty and other sexual deviances among historical pagan groups (Greco-Roman, mesopotamian, east Asian, Hindu, etc.), but yeah the tranny appropriation doesn't help.

[Anonymous No.21316359]

>>21316181
>lol what other "god" dies for cosmic dust in comparison
Yeah, only fake ones. It's absurd and horrific because it is a fantasy that appeals to your imagination. Christ is like a concern troll who acts like he wants to help you but is passive aggressively trying to control you.
Love existed before him and if it changed after him, it was by way of corrupting universality.

[Anonymous No.21317544]

>>21316097
>You really think because you like something that's evidence other people should agree with you?
Exhausting. Please produce evidence demonstrating the need for evidence you. Show me the statistics of statistics, the science of science, and the material of materialism. None of them exist. You live by faith alone.

[Anonymous No.21317753]

>>21317544
>uhhh listen here buddy we can't really know anything because evidence isn't real
>that's why you should specifically believe what I believe, because I said so
Can I interest you in buying a bridge in Brooklyn?

[Anonymous No.21317759]

>>21313018
Wow is this terrible.
Haven't visited this board in a while. Thought 2020 was bad but this is a new low

[Anonymous No.21318974]

>>21316181
Adolf Hitler was without a doubt a more relevant, real, and archetypical example of a tragic christ like figure, morso than Christ himself. He arguably has also affected the modern world more than Christ ever has.

[Anonymous No.21319072]

>>21314303
>Reason is something that another thing that is rational yet not reason can isolate and discuss and that thing is where Truth and faith is and how the Gospel speaks.

Absolutely incoherent gibberish. At no point in this word salad were you even close to a coherent point

[Anonymous No.21319101]

>>21317753
The evidentiary standard is not itself evidence-based thus contradictory and a value system you assent to via faith. Things can be known but obviously your "cold rationality" is just adopting a trendy analytical mindset in place of critical thought.
>>21319072
Brita'd

[Anonymous No.21319124]

>>21313018
Jesus was a rapist. That’s the real reason he got executed.

[Anonymous No.21319162]

>>21313018
>. In this central node of blankness, before going into anything resembling logic, violence, emotions, or anything of that sort where these metaphysical domains do not talk to one another, this center node, i.e. the space between algebra and geometry, is only filled via
via Jewish Ethnos
explain to me how any of this is valid to a person who isn't Jewish and suffering because of the beliefs of the Jews?

e.g. why do I need to worship Jesus and follow Paul to save myself from mutilating my childrens genitals if I'm not being commanded to mutilate my childrens genitals in the first place?

You can preach this to the Jews and it's valid and fine, but to most other cultures this is overly basic in the first place and introduces them, through the problem of "saving them from things they're not suffering from", to Jewish theology which then causes them to suffer.

Moreover, if a Jew is already suffering because of Jewish Theology as a rational adult when he or she can see the reason behind Jesus and Paul, then the damage has long been done to them personally already. Are they supposed to become Christians for a day and then, when cured, Atheists afterwards?

[Anonymous No.21319183]

>>21319162
ed.
2/2
>Moreover, if a Jew is already suffering because of Jewish Theology as a rational adult when he or she can see the reason behind Jesus and Paul, then the damage has long been done to them personally already. Are they supposed to become Christians for a day and then, when cured, Atheists afterwards?
Why not just Atheists immediately?

[Anonymous No.21319208]

>>21319162
>Moreover, if a Jew is already suffering because of Jewish Theology as a rational adult when he or she can see the reason behind Jesus and Paul, then the damage has long been done to them personally already. Are they supposed to become Christians for a day and then, when cured, Atheists afterwards?
Who the Son sets free is free indeed, so no - Christ is necessary in perpetuity for His Gospel to be valid itself so it is not a question of a day but of the pure faith fact which is repeated every day.

[Anonymous No.21319239]

>>21319208
ok well then you're back in the same problem by inadvertently introduce swathes of people a religion where you've established Jewish Ethnos as the culture.

Serious question,
Titus 1:16-21 "pay no heed to Jewish Fables"

Do you think a 'Christianity' without the OT and the Torah (et al.) is possible or is, as I sometimes suspect, what was intended in the first place by Paul and Jesus (Jesus vs. Priests)?

[Anonymous No.21319248]

Why is it more believable for a fully sentient, omnipotent and powerful being to form out of nothing than it is for an almost inert, slightly warm amount of matter that lacks sentience in almost all aspects to form from nothing?

[Anonymous No.21319271]

>>21319239
>Do you think a 'Christianity' without the OT and the Torah (et al.) is possible or is, as I sometimes suspect, what was intended in the first place by Paul and Jesus (Jesus vs. Priests)?
No. Christ fulfills the law and also invalidates it in a sense. It is required that the Israelites were a valid milennia old tribe because they create the worldly equivalent of heaven, where truth was hidden yet persistent bc in the same way spiritual truth works after Christ. Additionally, the Jobic model of testingGod's righteousness because totally fulfilled in Christ giving voice to pure moral goodness and compassion and also giving the true food of the eucharist as Kosher and making all animals fine to eat. Christ takes the law and its sins and cleanses them in forgiveness and the Jewish ethos is the idea of a genetic race and religion being one whereas after Christ the image and word become one in Christ. In the same way what is hidden is revealed with Christ so too Judaism becomes Catholicism.

[Anonymous No.21319279]

>>21319239
NTA but the NT is inseparable from the OT, the interconnectedness is massive at every level (thematic, typological, etc). Marcionism basically tried to do this early on to avoid some of the oddities of OT but that died out because it doesn't make sense.

[Anonymous No.21319295]

>>21319279
NTA but Marcionism is pretty much the only heresy worth refuting as everything else is nearly obviously wrong and does not challenge the core Christological claim.

[Anonymous No.21319354]

>>21319101
Why are you trying to shame me for asking you to prove your claims? What complete and utter horseshit. By not agreeing with you, I'm being "trendy" while you are "critical"? If there's no such thing as evidence for any claim then why don't you shut the fuck up and stop claiming things.

[Anonymous No.21319387]

>>21319279
It evidently did make sense to Paul and Jesus; I mean in many ways it's a rebuke of the Theocracy and the character and evil villainy of the Hebrews in the OT/Torah, as to say "if you thought this was God, you're stupid," etc.

Still I think the absurdism of gentiles adopting judaism to save themselves from the crses upon the jews by the god of te jews (i mean errors a non-jew isn't guitly of) is manifested in those "oddities", the evangelicals today are a good example where they actually go back and take lessons from the foul behavior of people like Lot, they end up, as consequence, emulating the worst aspects of Jewish Ethnos (both ethos and ethnos; racial habits and culture) as they believe themselves following a savior to save them from errors that only a Jew has in his head in the first place.

i.e.
you didn't need saving until you believed and did XYZ, now you do need saving, because you're doing racial supremacism in the name of God and doing the scapegoat ritual and believing yourself completely evil from original sin, etc.

> the NT is inseparable from the OT, the interconnectedness is massive at every level (thematic, typological, etc).
It is but it's "undone" and so "not to be taken seriously" as Jesus and Paul demonstrated. I mean that it's a paradox; you introduce the gentile to all of the bad things by introducing them to Christianity, whereas to a Jew; who already believe in all the bad things, the same act of introducing them to Christianity is to save them from those bad things - errors and false beliefs. But to anybody other than a Jew it's superfluous, or counter-to-aim anyway, 'if' the OT is treated as if it's full of prophets and good things.

>>21319271
>>21319279
>>21319295

Marcion, the compiler of the bible, was considered to be the first heretic (by the Imperial Church, Constantinople) for taking Pauls words on things above that of Jesus word on the same things, where the contradictions stood out.

FYI most Christians (from the Western Church, Catholicism post Schism) are full blown Marcionite and this is very easy to demonstrate when questioning them on their beliefs and then witnessing their disregard to be told that Jesus didn't ever say XYZ.

[Anonymous No.21319392]

> the crses upon the jews by the god of te jews
* the curses upon the jews by the god of the jews

[Anonymous No.21319506]

>>21319354
Sorry I should be clearer. The recourse to saying, "Evidence creates truthfulness" cannot have any evidence to support it and as such requiring evidence itself is not even required by the belief in evidence itself.
>>21319387
>FYI most Christians (from the Western Church, Catholicism post Schism) are full blown Marcionite and this is very easy to demonstrate when questioning them on their beliefs and then witnessing their disregard to be told that Jesus didn't ever say XYZ.
giga based

[Anonymous No.21319508]

>>21313018
1. Didn't read
2. you are a retard
3. you cannot prove Chistianity

[Anonymous No.21319540]

>>21319506
>I'm going to prove Christianity by not proving Christianity, because there's no such thing as proving anything

[Anonymous No.21319554]

>>21319540
Yes. This goes deeper that the very concept of proving requires faith itself and the only religion that demonstrates this non-space of all thought as based in faith for faith is Christ. You can argue this space has a rational category but you have the ability to fathom this category of non-thought as both rational and irrational and as such is totally free and totally unknown thus is pure faith itself. Only Christ describes this connundrum.

[Anonymous No.21319601]

>>21319554
If I wanted a religion that said all phenomena were ultimately indescribable and that the absolute truth is non-discursive, it would be Mahayana Buddhism. Christianity does not do this or make sort of claim about the world. You are taking a mallet to the idea of knowledge through empirical sources, likely in response to modern and postmodern criticism of western religion—criticism which sometimes sounds similar to Buddhism insofar as it refloats Heraclitus—to hide the fact that all of Christianity's dogmatic claims require you to affirm a bunch of unbelievable stuff, so by saying we can't believe in anything based on evidence and that faith is the basis of everything you are then able to, in your mind at least, level the playing field between proving that you have two thumbs and proving that an undead rabbi can make you eternal. But if there's no such thing as evidence why should we believe anything at all? Especially anything coming from someone who insists he can describe things despite there being no knowledge of them possible. If your premise is correct, your conclusion would mean you are a moron.

[Anonymous No.21319717]

>>21313018
Okay, I have some questions:

>We start with the true blank of discourse, where before entering into small talk, rational discourse, mathematic proves, violence, painting, and other forms of communication and I ask you which of these is rational to choose?

What happens when I choose each of these?

[Anonymous No.21319738]

>>21319717
One pill makes you larger and one pill makes you small, and the ones that mother gives you don't do anything at all

[Anonymous No.21321171]

>>21319738
go ask salas, when she was like "dawwwwl"

[Anonymous No.21321272]

>>21319601
>you have two thumbs and proving that an undead rabbi can make you eternal.
Both of these are true good job. You mistake my purpose in saying that your standard is untrue I am saying your standard is not possible to be a standard for itself which is only resolved in Christ saying that His testimony is true because He speaks not of Himself but if He were then it would be true. He is the only one to actually speak about the truthful dimensions the depths of the mind.
>>21319717
The question becomes how you think about happens and then those domains get split on themselves. Pointing a gun at someone is bad because someone points a gun at you but you sell the pen.

[Anonymous No.21321370]

>>21321272
>I am saying your standard is not possible to be a standard for itself which is only resolved in Christ saying that His testimony is true because He speaks not of Himself but if He were then it would be true. He is the only one to actually speak about the truthful dimensions the depths of the mind.
See here, you're doing the thing again >>21313669

[Anonymous No.21321489]

>>21313018
I feel like this was written in the comedown from LSD and made perfect sense during the trip because it was visual

Unfortunately to us it makes no sense and doesn't prove anything

[Anonymous No.21321681]

>>21313018
>the space between algebra and geometry, is only filled via Jesus Christ's Gospel

What the hell, why are you comparing the gospel with motherfckin algebra, what kind mental olympic long jump did you do to even assume that in the first place. You are not even making sense, you are comparing two things that have nothing to do with each other and if you think you do then you are not talking about gospels anymore, you are talking about whatever the hell you think the gospels represent.

[Anonymous No.21321699]

>>21313586
Are you threatening me?

[Anonymous No.21321705]

>>21313715

[Anonymous No.21322323]

>>21321370
I disagree
>>21321489
Dead sober
>>21321699
The Church belives in absolute religious liberty so no, not at all.

[Anonymous No.21322362]

>>21313018
Your writing has the air of someone who can recognize depth but has not yet fully integrated the truths of esotericism and exotericism. Comes off as a bit arrogant too. To put it simply, you have not read enough and you have not lived enough. I would recommend "Meditations on the Tarot: A Journey into Christian Hermeticis"; I believe you'll find it an insightful and fascinating read. I hope you continue on your path in good fortune.

[Anonymous No.21322530]

>>21313018
Thanks for that. Now I believe that the earth was made in 7 days, 6000 years ago. God as a being beyond both time and space clearly made us in his own image. I shall now reframe from calling people niggers on the internet because God, in His infinite mercy, will sent me to hell if I use a curse word.
>Ecclesiasticus 23:13 Use not thy mouth to intemperate swearing, for therein is the word of sin.

[Anonymous No.21322571]

>>21319101
>adopting a trendy analytical mindset in place of critical thought.
>So you should adopt a biblical mindset instead as it's more critical because...
>Because I said so alright!

[Anonymous No.21322645]

>>21313018
A very interesting perspective, and, at least after only just having read it and mulled it over a little, appears absolutely profound. May God glorify Himself through you further, anon.

To those who are saying it does not make sense. Read it more carefully and think it through. It makes perfect sense, and appears correct. You likely have not read enough analytical material if you're lost in it.

[Anonymous No.21322655]

>>21322530
God is infinitely merciful, yet also infinitely just. God would not send you to Hell anon, He died on a cross just to prevent it. You would send yourself to Hell out of your own willful rejection of His sacrifice, your love of sin, and your unwillingness to bring your life into subjection with what is pure.

[Anonymous No.21322665]

>>21322362
>comes off as a bit arrogant too
I'm not OP, but actually, that's you anon.
>you have not read or lived enough
Also seems like you. Had you read and lived enough, rather than taking a feeble sage-on-a-mountaintop condescending attitude you could have offered the rebuttal to his argument, or sent his argument in the direction of the point at which it falls apart. Your post is hollow, and fortune is a vain concept.

Also, there is no such things as Christian sorcery or Tarot reading. Abandon those sins and turn to God.

[Anonymous No.21322759]

>>21313715
No. I'm surprised so many of you are struggling with his argument.

[Anonymous No.21322771]

>>21322665
Christian mysticism is not sorcery and neither is the tarot as a means to study the Mystery. There's nothing to refute, its a mishmashed word salad that has the appearance of theological rigor but not the depth. The arrogance I was referring to was not in regards his tone or his perception of other people, rather the presumption that one could offer a proof for the Master. The need to humble yourself before God can be understood through the (lowercase) mystery of the fifth arcana, the hierophant, more traditionally known as the pope. The gist of it being that we must wound our hands and feet, figuratively, with the nails like the Master, so that we may not let the gift of near infinite possibility blind us to our station in life, to assume a role as initiator, as there is only one initiator. As anything is possible through Him, so is it possible to abuse his gifts for the mistreatment of others. The wounds of the hands and feet are there with the aim to inhibit prideful, selfish, or sinful action, action for one's own personal gain. Once we have these wounds in place (how these wounds come about is through prayer, meditation, study, life in servitude of the Master, etc...) we must place upon our heads the crown of thorns, so to keep the mind's natural inclinations of pride in check. To paraphrase the anonymous author of the text further: esotericism, the church of John, does not supplant exotericism, the church of Peter, but rather supplements it as the complimentary half. I apologize if I came off as arrogant. I was half asleep when I wrote it and I certainly could have phrased things more clearly.

[Anonymous No.21322786]

>>21322645
>It makes perfect sense, and appears correct
If you have to already believe Christian dogma for the "proof" for Christianity to also be believed, the "proof" is worthless.

[Anonymous No.21322837]

>>21322530
>Thanks for that. Now I believe that the earth was made in 7 days,
Not Church teaching.
>6000 years ago.
Not Church teaching.
>God as a being beyond both time and space clearly made us in his own image.
Yes.
>I shall now reframe from calling people niggers on the internet because God, in His infinite mercy, will sent me to hell if I use a curse word.
Not Church teaching.

[Anonymous No.21322868]

>>21322771
(op now) I fully welcome the criticism of supplanting the role as initiator and that is duly noted. I think Catholics have a mandate now, through the priesthood of all the sanctity of the freedom of religion, to not not only seek inward perfection in quiet prayer and contemplation and focus on God but also in an outward way that is both at once vigorous and open. We cannot, in good conscience, permit freedom of religion while also encouraging silence as before in law now in speech and acts and as such the role of proof here offered is intended as a negative of proofs to demonstrate that only Christ's speech method match the actual nature of the image of God in our soul.

[Anonymous No.21322872]

>>21322645
Tahnk you for your kind words and many blessings on you too!

[Anonymous No.21323138]

Why are """conservative""" evangelicals so cucked on the question of women? I saw a video of this conservative evangelical pastor and someone asked him if female pastors are acceptable, and he said "Well I think women are capable of pretty much anything men can do, I've been taught by many women, and I think it's an area where people can agree to disagree."
Are you serious?
How can a Christian give any answer besides a strong NO to that question?
Paul literally says in the Bible that women are to be quiet in church and that they are not to have authority over men!
Aren't these "conservative evangelicals" supposed to be strong Bible believers?
Are they controlled opposition?

[Anonymous No.21323355]

>>21322837
You're nuts.

[Anonymous No.21323360]

>>21322786
You don't. You just didn't get it. His argument is 100% outside of any need for dogmatic belief.

[Anonymous No.21323371]

>>21322771
The Bible says otherwise (end of argument). The inter-church disputes which took place to permit it were put forth by subversive sorcerers themselves. As for the OP's argument. You didn't get it.

[Anonymous No.21323510]

The Masonic philosophy of Darwinian evolution is heresy in the Orthodox Church, whereas the Roman Catholics seem to have embraced it.

[Anonymous No.21323530]

>>21323510
It's not heresy, it's largely accepted.
However, there is a growing body of priesthood that is evolution-skeptical and some have written against it.

[Anonymous No.21323532]

>>21323371
>The Bible says otherwise (end of argument).
The Bible says that God literally gave the Israelite priests divination devices to use in the temple

[Anonymous No.21323552]

>>21313018
>mathematic proves

[Anonymous No.21323618]

>>21323530
Orthodox priests were writing against evolution since the belief first appeared in the 1800s such as Saint John of Kronstadt.

[Anonymous No.21323660]

>>21323618
A million people could write against it; that has no bearing on whether or not it's true

[Anonymous No.21323665]

>>21323660
Yeah but it's not true.

[Anonymous No.21323676]

>>21323665
That's your opinion but there is a veritable mountain of geological and genetic evidence that disagrees

[Anonymous No.21323685]

>>21313018
Very nice.

I was of the belief that all behavior was driven by fear. That everything was fear based. That the intensity of one's capacity for love is derived from the intensity of one's fear. I was very wrong. This is simply what it seems like when you operate completely from the ego. When I found out about the existence of souls, which I did not believe in, I realized that love is very real as well, and that it too can drive behavior in an even more significant way than fear and the ego.