> Came from the desert and had strict customs
> Originally despised by all, most people had a negative bias against them
> Infiltrated step by step the decadent roman world
> Slowly but steadily took positions of power
> When they finally took absolute power, they quickly ordered the destruction of their former enemies
Is this a constant with new religions? Have something simillar happened to say, with the first buddhists on south-east Asia?
>>1122419
>Is this a constant with new religions?
No, it's an Abrahamic thing. The kikes genocided every non-kike they could find when they first adopted jehova-worship, the christards did the same and the mudscums have followed in their wake. I suspect it has something to do with the total lack of morality in these religions, where blind obedience to an arbitrary set of rules takes the place of genuine moral reasoning, allowing people to commit even the most horrific crimes with a clean conscience.
You have a point.
Not trying to defend that behaviour, but doesnt those laws and texts explicitely give them a moral or ethical code?
What happens with other religions that also have a written set of rules like Taoism and their Tao te Ching. Taoist although lax in some aspect, were (if any taoist survive) extremely moral people.
Also confucians had a rigid strict set of codes and moral customs.
Then, where is morality coded on classic religion? We know we have written examples on texts but who gave them the absolute authority?
>>1122419
Are you saying Christians are Jews?
>>1122419
>was ISIStianity the original ISIS?
Sandreligions gonna sandreligion.
As a matter of fact any Christian who opposes the Islamization of Europe is a hypocrite. They are only doing the same thing and using the same methods that the Christians used two millenia ago.
>parasite and infiltrate a superior culture
>go for the women and marginalized individuals which are the weakest link in the chain of society
>stir shit up and when met with response from the authorities, claim persecution
>attract the attention of opportunistic and demagogue politicians
>when gaining power, viciously persecute all opposition
They don't oppose Islam qua Islam. They oppose it because they are fighting for the same turf.
>>1122419
>everyone hated them!
>but they also attracted converts and gained influential positions in society!
ok op
>>1122535
The rise of Islam in Europe is directly the result of existential malaise caused by aggressive secularism and the decline of the church.
Christians are also in a way the first liberals.
>you know all that tolerance we were demanding from you? You're not gonna get any from us
>>1122549
>the rise of the new totalitarian sand religion is due to the decline of the competing sand religion
Your point?
>>1122564
That secularism is a joke.
>>1122419
Well, the Abrhamic religions tend to give their followers a holier-then-thou thing.
>>1122573
Christfaggotry is a joke, except it's not funny.
>>1122535
>As a matter of fact any Christian who opposes the Islamization of Europe is a hypocrite. They are only doing the same thing and using the same methods that the Christians used two millenia ago
>>parasite and infiltrate a superior culture
If Europe was still Christian, this would be true, but Europe is a rotting carcass of it's former glory
>>go for the women and marginalized individuals which are the weakest link in the chain of society
This isn't true of Muslims, most of the "refugees" are men, and the change affecting Europe is a foreign demographic one; the same could be argued for Christians, but you'd have to identify which demographic.
>>stir shit up and when met with response from the authorities, claim persecution
Rome demanded tribute to pagan gods. What does Europe require of Muslims? Don't jihad?
>>attract the attention of opportunistic and demagogue politicians
How was this true for Christians? Heck how is this true for even Muslims?
>>when gaining power, viciously persecute all opposition
This is true for every system of beliefs, ever.
>They don't oppose Islam qua Islam. They oppose it because they are fighting for the same turf.
Is this your thesis or a supporting point? I'm going to need evidence either way
>>1122605
How's your Arabic coming along?
>>1122535
I don't remember reading about Christians wanting to establish a theocratic state that beheaded infidels and waged an eternal crusade against the Romans, nor do I remember them commiting mass murder before they got into power.
>>1122442
Thus, why I never liked the Abrahamic religions.
>>1122442
>blind obedience to an arbitrary set of rules takes the place of genuine moral reasoning
Jesus LITERALLY preached against this exact kind of behavior. Why do you think the Pharisees hated him so much?
>Healing on the Sabbath?!? THAT IS AGAINST THE RULES REEEEEE
>>1122442
t. Dylan "Sverjmyr the Gray" Smith
>>1122640
>implying Christianity isn't just about Jesus's preaching
I will take "Who is Paul?" for $500
>>1122752
>Who is Paul?
The author of this verse which similarly denounces blind obedience to rules:
He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant--not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
- 2 Cor 3:6
No, people were genociding and raping before Abraham was even born.
>>1122606
If Europe was still Christian, this would be true, but Europe is a rotting carcass of it's former glory
its kind of hard to infiltrate and parasitize a culture that isn't a rotting carcass. Rome was on the downslope of its own history by the time Christianity came to be and it only proved to become more decadent as time went on
>This isn't true of Muslims, most of the "refugees" are men, and the change affecting Europe is a foreign demographic one; the same could be argued for Christians, but you'd have to identify which demographic.
are refugees not weak links in the social chain? The point still stands, both religions targeted easy to convert individuals and used them to expand the follower base
>Rome demanded tribute to pagan gods. What does Europe require of Muslims? Don't jihad?
This is the most annoying thing here, even without a demand by the western world to act human they continue to stir up shit and cause problems. At least early christians had some small moral base to justify their actions
>This is true for every system of beliefs, ever.
agreed desu, it doesnt matter what kind of sky fairy you believe in. Most religions are cults designed specifically to control a populace and this is the kind of thing that results from attempting to take control of society from a standpoint of morality
>>1122419
More or less yes.
>>1122581
But how do we wipe them out? There are so many of them, and atheism just lacks the appeal needed to get the job done.
What can overcome kikery?
>>1122938
Thelemetism.
>>1122442
You're wrong.
Look up the religious turmoil of India and SE Asia.
Take a look at the history of Jainism.
>>1122559
Jainism.
>>1122618
because one person couldn't commit mass murder before
>>1122442
/thread
>>1122945
Ah yes the belief system founded by a homosexual junkie degenerate is just what the West needs to get back on track!
>>1122640
What Jesus "taught" is not what Christianity is about. Have you taken a look at the bible? Half the book is fucking Paul and Jesus never wrote anything, he's used as a sock puppet by every writer who seems to have him saying all sorts of contradicting things.
And for the vast majority Christian history the bible wasn't the center of the religion! It wasn't even real document until the 3rd or 4th centuary. And after it was made the power of a bishop was greater than the power of the bible.
The bible has only been the supreme force after the Protestant reformation.
I'll repeat. Christianity slimed it's way up civilization before there was such a thing as the new testament.
>>1122945
>literally roleplaying
>>1122640
That cannot be true if Jesus is the God of the Torah. It's that simple. And no, and the Pharisees hated him for many reasons not just one that happens to support your ridiculous claim.
>>1122640
The idea that only faith in Jesus is required for salvation is a grotesque and evil dogma that has lead to untold wickedness. The fact that Jesus replaced one set of arbitrary rules with another one is not a positive thing, Judaism was leaving it's violent stage when Paul kickstarted the cycle all over again.
>>1122995
>Christianity is not about the teachings of Christ
>>1122549
this is no way whatsoever is contrary to his point, nor does it attack the credibility of secularism. what a fucking waste
>>1122573
shitposting
>>1123047
>The only rules Jesus preached were to love God with all your heart, soul and mind and to love your neighbor as yourself.
Well the second part is literally impossible, and the first part is something a demon would want, not god. What sense does it make for god to demand people worship him? Isn't setting up religions to lead people astray what the devil is supposes to do? Idiotic.
>>1123010
>>1122992
Hey, it's fun! And come on now, it spawns great men!
>>1122934
christians were the ultimate fedoras apparently, on top of being wrong.
>>1123053
With God, all things are possible and to know God is to worship Him.
>>1123065
Nice thought terminating cliche. Good goy.
>>1122419
What do you mean is it consistent with new religions?
Name another that behaved like this. Islam wasn't as religiously extreme as it was politically at first. Muhammad and his merry men were conquerors first, missionaries second.
>>1123065
"Even the demons believe and they are not saved"
Quite spreading progressive bullshit. The NT is pretty fucking clear that you need to outright submit yourself entirely to him, not just 'know him." Anything short of that would be considered self idolatry, and has been historically.
Paul wasn't calling himself a slave/ servant of Christ for shits and giggles. To serve God is to worship Him.
>>1122538
Through appealing to the masses, by stealing pagan morals and attaching the fear of god to them. Degenerate.
>>1123095
Any religion that considers being a slave, to anyone or anything, is an extremist religion.
>>1123095
The demons know that God exists but they do not know Him just like I know the president exists but I do not know him.
Christians choose to serve God because we love Him.
>>1123160
>Christians choose to serve God because we love Him.
And you "love" him because if you DON'T, he'll burn you in a lake of fire forever. Because he "loves" you, too!
>>1123170
We love Him because although we failed He forgave us.
>>1123085
If every new religion that comes (not heresies or minor variant) comes spawns extremist that behave like dindus on bath salts or that it is just a Abrahamic thing
>>1123189
>He forgave us.
"Forgave" you? Yeah, no. If someone forgives you, that's it, over and done. If someone "forgives" you but then expects you to grovel pathetically and sing his praises all day, OR ELSE ITS THE FIERY PIT FOR YOU, then that's not actually "forgiveness", that's "blackmail".
>>1122419
>original extremists
no, not realy, no, definitely not original, humans just have some general tendencies
>>1123220
As I continue to stumble He continues to forgive and it gives me great joy to sing His praises.
>>1123047
I'm not sure what he was referring to, I can't think of a time where Paul directly condoned violent behavior. What he did do that fucked shit up up to this day is reinforce sexism and anti-homosexuality (the term homophobia pisses me off). Before I go on let me remind you that when Paul wrote his letters, he claimed that they were divine, being very clear when giving his own personal opinion. So he's reinforcing these destructive prejudices with an understood "thus says the Lord." (I Corinthians 7: 25)
He declared that women could not speak in church services - they were declared qualified only to teach kids.
He also justifies the submission of women to their husbands and male church leaders by pointing out that Adam wasn't the one who was deceived but rather Eve who was and sinned and caused Adam to sin as well. To atone for this transgression, all women must be tortured in childbirth. Imagine what that does to a girl's perspective. Imagine what that did and continues to do to billions of them. (I Timothy 2, I Corinthians 14:34-35) Fuck Paul.
Regarding homosexuality, his multiple condemnations of it led to 2 millennia of their persecution, which continues to this day. Not so much in the West, but its affects still show there too. (Rom 1: 26-27, I Corinthians 6: 9-10, I Timothy 1: 8-11) Imagine living in a society that considers your nature utterly shameful and worships a God that at one point commanded his people to stone them in the public square.
So yea, not violence per se, but he's responsible for an unfathomable amount of pain. Not a whole lot of people can top him.
He helped countless people tremendously as well, but when you take into account the scope of the atrocities you just cannot praise this guy.
>>1123237
Good goy. Don't waver now, or else ITS THE FIERY PIT! Because he LOVES you!
>>1123237
Stockholm Syndrome
>>1123251
Women were created to help men and it is true that Eve chose to trust the serpent.
Homosexuality is a detestable practice that ought to be discouraged because it is nothing more than sterile stimulation of the flesh.
I am sure that Paul would rather you praise Jesus than himself.
>>1122419
>Egypt
>religious career was a respectable job.
>you would actually work hard. Learn all sorta of rites according to your rank and get privileges equal to those of the Pharaoh himself.
>All while following your path towards eternal life and enlightenment.
>some millenia later, a bunch of proto-Canaanites invent some backwards dogma and call it religion.
>they pretty much profit from it and use it to justify wars against X nation or people.
>mfw their religion is spreading
>mfw their religion got several dlcs and a sequel.
>mfe crippled spirituality everywhere by twisting foreign beliefs and legends to assimilate them, provoked genocides on all continents and is basically a big business.
Life is not fair.
>>1123251
Just because some of the stuff sounds horrible to our modern minds does not make it not True.
Have you ever met a homosexual that wasn't a raging materialist? Who acted contrary to his own gender and engaged in perversity?
Don't believe the lies you see on television about gays or lesbians, there completely nuts in real life. Devoid of any detectable virtue or even basic self control.
>>1123353
>Don't believe the lies you see on television about gays or lesbians, there completely nuts in real life. Devoid of any detectable virtue or even basic self control.
oof man. That's pretty tough to read. The thing is, most of what went into forming my opinion of people who are gay was having been friends with many. I've not draw your conclusion, and I think that someone who honestly gets to know a good few would as well.
But even if that were to be the case, a person's behavior is a consequence of their genome and the environment it developed in. To condemn them as a person is to be scientifically illiterate.
>>1123396
>To condemn them as a person is to be scientifically illiterate.
What is a man, but a miserable pile of genes and the environment it developed in?
>>1123353
also, if you logically assess the consequences of the verses I cited, rather than suppressing that urge in favor of blind faith, you would see that it is harmful. It is not good. It would be better to do away with. It cannot have come from an entity that is all good, because this could have been better.
>>1123403
whatever it might be, it cannot be something morally accountable to the extent you are claiming.
>>1122419
It is a constant with Revolutions. Religion is just another -and possibly the most powerful- way of subversion against an imperant ideological system.
The Roman authorities saw them as a present menace in the same way the Capitalists powers saw communism as a menace.
>>1123421
It is the word of God. You can't just disagree with it.
>>1123459
>It is the word of God.
According to who? Itself? yeah, real compelling "argument" you have their.
God never says anything, men speak on his behalf.
>>1123459
>It is the word of God. You can't just disagree with it.
spot the cuckold
>>1123506
I don't care that you don't care
>>1123459
this is what it boils down to. these are the cold facts. There once were men that wrote these books, and claimed that these writings were inspired by a perfectly good god. But the books have been found to contain incorrect information, so they cannot have been written by a perfect god. Those men were wrong.
This happens all the time. This happens in nearly every single culture. You're not stupid, you just fell for something that you yourself understand billions of others fall for.
>>1123523
Good, then we understand each other. Peace be with you.
>>1123536
well I do care what you think. I thought what you did for most of my life, and I wouldn't wish it on my enemies. I hope one day you try to read these open-mindedly, and I don't blame you for your inability to do so currently.
One thing about Christianity is that when it first started there were different versions. Each social class responded differently.
Highly Jewish communities were Ebionetes. They did not see Jesus as a God nor did they see him as changing any Jewish laws. He was a new prophet introducing new laws that stacked with the old ones. In addition like all Jewish prophets he really didn't care for non-Jews. Most likely James, Jesus's brother was one such person. In general Ebionetes were mostly chill and respected even by Roman authorities.
Upper class gentiles groups who would have been educated in Platonism and hung out in mystery cults tended to be Gnostics. They completly folded Jesus into the Roman way of looking at Gods, putting higher priority on Roman sources than Jewish sources (for instance they rejected 100% of the old testament including it's God). Jesus was one of many Gods, but a very powerful one, that came from the world of Forms to give important advice about the Forms. They are reported to have some really weird rituals but never really caused trouble. They were kind of elitist dick-heads but never caused any real problems beyond being know-it-assholes.
The Christianity we got, and what consitutes most of the cannon work was popular with lower class Gentiles: slaves, prostitutes, people with every reason to be resentful and nothing to lose. This is why the religion was causing such as fuss, you had the scum of the earth united under one banner, saying the oppressed were blessed and their God who didn't do nuffin would return and bring revengence. They were basically proffessional victims and would go out of their way to find ways of being oppressed.
>>1123543
I have read the Bible plenty of times. I do realize that there's a lot in it that's difficult to accept, and that there is a lot in it that seems bigoted, even cruel, by our standards. I realize there is a lot in it that seems not to make sense.
However, I have faith in Christ Jesus, and I believe he has not led me astray. I have seen the way he works in my life and in the lives of others. I believe, contrary to some people, that he does indeed love all people, and wants what is best for us. From my faith in him, I have faith in Scripture.
One of my favorite books of the Bible is actually the Book of Job, precisely because it grapples with aspects of God's behavior that don't always make sense to us. Job maintains his innocence throughout, even though his friends all insist that he must have done something wrong. In the end, though, God himself justifies Job, and crucially, restores or replaces everything that was taken from him. God, in the end, is just, even if it doesn't seem that way at various points in our lives.
I'm not sure what more I can say. I'm sorry you had a bad experience with Christianity. If it really did hurt you, I'm even more sorry. I hope you're at peace.
>>1123576
I understand. I believed as well and helped lead worship for countless church services throughout my community. I benefited tremendously, and felt so immersed in love whenever I'd play it made it difficult to keep tempo.
I grew up with hundreds of people who felt the same way, and saw how their lives were benefited as well. But these affects can be seen in countless other cultures with religions that all contradict each other. Because of this, we are only in a position to say that it is helpful, but when addressing the truth of the underlying cause the only thing we HAVE is reason.
When we are presented with 50 books, each of which claim to have been divinely inspired by a perfect entity and each of which disagree with each other, and each of which manifest intensely spiritual experiences, the ONLY thing we have at our disposal to discern which is true is to be as reasonable as possible.
If you yourself truly look at it strictly from this position, I know you'll see the contradiction. So has nearly every ethicist. We cannot trust the Bible given our current circumstances.
How then can you expect a truly good entity to condemn you to eternal suffering for not accepting something like this given our position?
>>1123651
>each of which disagree with each other
They don't tho. Yes you can pull verses out of context and play "gotcha!" but that doesn't change the fact the spiritual framework (which is more than the sum of its parts) is cohesive.
>>1123576
Since the ancients studied carefully by Christian theologians as well, when we speak of what is good it is in reference to our personal well being or that of people in general.
If I am responsible for the sentience of a person and then proceed to torture them, by the very definition that we ascribe to the term "good" I am being evil. For a creator to be considered good in relation to its creation, its behavior towards it must pass the same scrutiny.
As a Christian I was in large company when evangelizing the Bible by showing how its principles helped people. This in a sense was evidence for its truth. How then do we not apply this to areas that are clearly abhorrent and destructive? Clearly irrational or swayed by the culture of their times?
>>1123671
oh no I meant different scriptures entirely
>>1123684
ancients,* studied
>>1123671
what I'm saying is that you have many different scriptures at your disposal, each one led millions of people to experience intense spiritual experiences that benefited their lives, each one claims to have been written by a perfect and good god, but each scripture disagrees.
Either they're all wrong, or one is right. If it makes a claim about physical nature without being allegorical that turns out to wrong, then it wasn't written by a perfect entity. If it claims a certain action is good for people but it turns out that it's not, then it wasn't written by a perfect entity.
The bible makes many erroneous physical and moral claims, and we can openly show why. No faith required.
>>1123651
>the ONLY thing we have at our disposal to discern which is true is to be as reasonable as possible.
Putting aside the fact people become Christian because they meet Jesus, the past 2000 years of history demonstrates Christianity's superiority.
>So has nearly every ethicist.
Obviously not the Christian ones.
>>1123690
>>1123715
>The bible makes many erroneous physical claims
This conclusion is based on the assumption that an omnipotent deity can't selectively intervene in the processes of His creation.
Miracles exist anon.
>The bible makes many erroneous moral claims
God defines what is moral; see Euthyphro's second horn.
>>1123732
when talk about what is good we are not talking about what the whims of our potential creator. If you'd like to talk about that then give it another name. A creator that tortures its creation is by definition not good. What you're actually saying is that Christian morality is not based on good and evil, but the whims of Yahweh. But we're gonna change the definition of good and evil to "what Yahweh wants and what Yaweh doesn't want. That's pretty pathetic.
>>1123717
>superiority
easy there buddy. There are many religions lasting many thousands of years with many millions of converts with much more moral and scientifically accurate passages. And even if that weren't to be the case, it doesn't address anything I said. Troll somewhere else.
>>1123732
>This conclusion is based on the assumption that an omnipotent deity can't selectively intervene in the processes of His creation.
So God allowed errors and falsehoods to be preserved in his Bible? To what end? To undermine the authority of his text?
>>1123749
not many thousands but you get the point lol, comparable to Christianity. And again, this is fucking irrelevant because the book is fucking wrong
anyway peace out
>>1122559
Buddhism
>>1123750
isnt it always the same answer tho - its not a glitch its a feature
>>1123773
>Miracles are neither errors nor falsehoods.
Okay. What about the errors and falsehoods that have nothing to do with miracles, but that simply reflect the general ignorance and superstition of the times? Why did God allow those to persist?
>>1123785
>not turning your glitches into features
>>1123788
To teach us about ourselves.
>>1123793
they were not claimed to be allegorical until after we discovered they were false
>>1123793
But all it teaches us is that no book is perfect, and thus we should not put our trust in anything written by men. This seems to defeat the purpose of recording god's message to his creation in a book in the first place.
>>1123773
No, like was said like 4 fucking times already. It can be TRUE that a creator created creation, but if it chooses to torture its creation than by the VERY DEFINITION OF WHAT GOOD IS, we say that that creator TRULY is EVIL. How is this difficult to grasp? We don't change definitions like that, wtf??
>>1123773
If it says that people were on this planet for 10k years, but everything we study from every angle imaginable strongly suggests we we're on this planet for much much much longer than that, it has nothing to do with miracles. It's just wrong. Multiply this example by a textbook of others, and this endeavor becomes a complete joke.
>>1123825
>The letter kills but the spirit gives life.
That's nice, but given that the Bible contains errors and falsehoods, and given that these errors are not clearly indicated and indeed where taken as correct until proven wrong, it follows that there is no way to know what, if anything, is actually accurate in the Bible, and what is yet more error. Exodus? Myth. Eden? Babylonian myth. God? How do I know God isn't a myth, too, just like that talking snake?
>>1123825
if I tell you i fucked your mom, and later you find out I didn't fuck your mom and come back to me asking why I lied, you would be in the right to punch me in the jaw if I told you I was being truthfully allegorical.
The bible claims things to be literally true, not nice stories to help us out. It said the earth was made 10k years ago. That is almost certainly wrong. It said humanity came form two people. That is almost certainly wrong. It said that behavior is not caused by the brain. That is almost certainly wrong. It said that certain things god wanted were good for us, when in fact they were terrible for us.
Given the competition and wealth of available information, how long do you think it will take the general public to see just how ridiculous the Bible is when considered perfect and divine?
>>1123851
Yes, it gives a very detailed genealogy from adam to noah and noah to abraham. It says that people were begat in the fertile crescent, which 10k is where civilization began making the myth understandable, but we came from africa way way before that and there's more than enough to support it. There is no evidence whatsoever to support your claim outside the bible.
>>1123847
Genre is essential to deriving meaning so to use your example, I would be mistaken to interpret an anonymous stranger telling me vulgar things about my family through a post on an internet forum to be factual. Similarly, genre needs to be taken into consideration when interpreting holy scripture. You will misunderstand prophetic literature if you read it like a science textbook.
>>1123565
I swear plebeians ruin everything
>>1123860
reasonably? because that's the only way I'm supposed to read a science textbook. Are you telling me that I am not supposed to use reason in interpreting scripture? if that's the case, than you cannot discuss those implications because this entire enterprise is founded on the assumption that we will be reasonable, otherwise communication is pointless.
claim - humanity (adam and eve) began between the tigris and euphrates
this claim is false.
Now, if you decide that reason can go fuck itself, so be it. But you are lying to people every time you tell them it didn't happen, because the standard they assume you base that conclusion on is logic, rather than just pulling it outta your ass and saying "faith is enough."
because of this, most theologians don't take this passage literally. This only became the case recently
>>1122472
Are you saying they are not? Christianity is literally a branch of judaism.
Goodnight and God bless. I've enjoyed debating with you and I will be keeping you all in my prayers.
>>1123877
"like a science textbook" is a completely meaningless phrase. tell me how exactly I am reading it wrong? it sas "adam and eve lived here" am I supposed to read it as "maybe adam and maybe eve maybe lived here, but forget that bit and try to be a better person from the lessons you learn about them maybe having been there?"
Because that's bat fucking shit insane.
>>1123565
>The Christianity we got, and what consitutes most of the cannon work was popular with lower class Gentiles: slaves, prostitutes, people with every reason to be resentful and nothing to lose. This is why the religion was causing such as fuss, you had the scum of the earth united under one banner, saying the oppressed were blessed and their God who didn't do nuffin would return and bring revengence. They were basically proffessional victims and would go out of their way to find ways of being oppressed.
QFT.
>>1122606
>This isn't true of Muslims
Women are, first of all, (1) retarded, and second,(2) more open to this kind of thing for some reason I will never understand but somehow related to (1)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1324039/Like-Lauren-Booth-ARE-modern-British-career-women-converting-Islam.html
http://standpointmag.co.uk/features-may-10-why-do-western-women-convert-julie-bindel-islam-female-conversion
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11390382/Muslim-female-converts-Were-more-religious-and-more-hated.html
>>1124315
Cont.
You can read in the very Christian hagiographies that many of the first saints and martyrs were such empowered wominz.
Celsus, in the polemical essay against the Christians, (which was "lost", probably in the Christian intifada, and survives only in quotations), Celsus claimed that the Christian religion only appealed to women and plebeians, and grown men laughed at it.
Again, the treason of women and openness to exotic, foreign elements can't be underestimated in the decline of civilizations. We're living in the last days of the Roman Empire.
>>1123885
He went to bed because it must be tiring repeating the same "it's not wrong, it's true, because miracles!" shit over and over.
Jesus fuck, I get this shit at work from my born again boss and coworker. You can talk shit about fedoras and whatever the fuck, but it's always them bringing it up when it's completely unnecessary and it always boils down to the same argument: "you gotta have faith man, that's why you're wrong and I'm right".
>>1122419
If you read about the Bar-Kokhba revolt and all of the other wars the Jews had against the Romans, you will understand why it would not be difficult to draw comparisons between modern Islam and Judaism of that time. The Romans got sick of that shit and slaughtered the Jews, razed Jerusalem to the ground, told them they could never worship there again, and then scattered them to the winds. That's what it took to create modern Judaism with its message of spiritual rather than literal messianism and a less strict adherence to the 600 plus commandments presented in the Book of Moses.
Christianity is wholly unlike the other Abrahamic religions. Whereas Judaism was founded by a priesthood class who desired to maintain power in a insular nation-state and Islam was founded by a conqueror who needed to establish rules and laws to govern the conquered, Christianity was founded primarily as a way of bringing meaning to the lives of slaves and the disenfranchised across a vast Empire. It preached that the Kingdom of God was not on the Earth and would not be obtained by the works of men, whereas Judaism and Islam preach the importance of control of material world (in Judaism the Holy Land, and in Islam basically the entire planet).
That's the fundamental difference. Christianity and its followers were never perfect, but since peaceful coexistence with your fellow man and rule of secular law are central doctrines of the Christian religion, it was able to form and shape modern Western society that we know and benefit from.
>>1124590
And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.
- Hebrews 11:6
>>1124767
>form and shape modern Western society that we know and benefit from.
This meme. Western society was succesfull in spite of Christ-Islamity, not because of Christ-Islamity, and this because of the quality of its people. Ethiopia and Latin America are majority Christian and nevertheless are third-world disease and crime infested shitholes. The West has been secular for quite some time now, meanwhile Christianity grows faster among third-world populations and what is happening? Is the West falling into barbarity and is the third-world quickly reaching developed status thanks to muh Christian values helped shape blah blah blah? No, third-world is still third-world and third-worlderst are fleeying their third-world shitholes into the secularized West. Now get rekt christcuck.
>>1122671
t. Christian McChristychrist
>>1122752
>>implying Christianity isn't just about Jesus's preaching
Are you fucking illiterate? You're saying Christanity is just about Jesus' teachings
>>1125032
>Is the West falling into barbarity
Hmmm...
>>1125032
Well birthrates in secular societies have all plummeted to far below sustainable rates, and the only reason 1st world countries are experiencing any growth at all is due to immigration from third world countries where there isn't as much social pressure to succeed, and therefore people have children at rates above which society needs to perpetuate.
But that's ok because we'll all be immortal cyborgs uploading our brains into computers in a few years, right?
>don't kill non-believers
>gladly die for Jesus Christ as they know it's not the end for them
Here's the difference
>>1126037
>>don't kill non-believers
stopped reading there
>>1125057
>.au
There's your problem. Literally an entire country populated by trailer trash.
>>1123027
Jews. Never change.
Murder Messiah.
Reject Kingdom.
Blame murdered Messiah for not bringing in rejected Kingdom.
>>1123251
God let His views on homosexuality be known at Sodom and Gomorrah.
>>1126009
>and therefore people have children at rates above which society needs to perpetuate.
Making this moot does not require
>immortal cyborgs uploading our brains into computers
In a decade or few, those third world countries that are riding on their population will be in a massive crisis.
>>1125055
Jew thinks Paul doesn't matter. Paul, a member of the Sanhedrin.
>>1126071
There are not two decades left.
>>1123565
>Highly Jewish communities were Ebionetes. They did not see Jesus as a God
Eliminates the whole point of Christianity. Might as well stay a Jew if you're going to combine some surface level Christianity to your overwhelming Judaism. Full retard.
>Upper class gentiles groups who would have been educated in Platonism and hung out in mystery cults tended to be Gnostics.
Gnosticism, since day one, has been fought against by the mainline (and it even persists today) because it asserts shit that outright undermines the legitimacy of both the old testament God and Christ himself. Christianity never was a mystery cult, it was inclusive; if you want one of those, join a fucking Greek cult like Attis, not this one. Again, inherently incompatible and self-contradictory.
>The Christianity we got, and what consitutes most of the cannon work was popular with lower class Gentiles: slaves, prostitutes, people with every reason to be resentful and nothing to lose.
This was who the gospel was aimed at; the meek and the poor, those whose place in the world was spurned by those who had the power to lord over them cruelly. Blessed are the poor, and such. And you're acting like this is a bad thing?
>They were basically professional victims and would go out of their way to find ways of being oppressed.
Christianity did not have an AIPAC, they were hated primarily by the Jewish hegemony who contracted Roman muscle to break kneecaps and make them become lion meat. Saying they were professional victims is the same as saying, in this context, they were professional, and easy, targets.
>>1126096
This. The general trend of birthrates is determined by wealth. Simply put: In agrarian African societies without welfare it is economically smart to get 10 kids. In a highly specialized service economy with welfare kids are economical suicide.
Religion and culture do have an affect, which can clearly be seen with countries like Ireland and Germany.
Lowest birthrates are in Eastern Europe, which is quite obvious because they are modern service economies, but the general population is quite poor.
>>1126118
Portugal, Spain and Poland < 1.3?? B-but only secularized societies have low birthrates...
>>1126118
>that map
RIP colorblind people
>>1126142
And what does make a secularized country?
>>1126071
>Making this moot does not require
Perhaps, though it remains to be seen if the west can summon the political will to reverse a trend that no other society in history has been able too.
>In a decade or few, those third world countries that are riding on their population will be in a massive crisis.
Actually that crisis is upon us, it's called anthropogenic climate change, and as time goes on and the weather becomes more severe, more desperate people will abandon these regions.
>>1126096
>Lower birthrates have to do with industrialization and higher incomes, not secularism or lack thereof
and yet classical Athens and the Roman Empire both experienced population decline despite pre-dating industrialization by nearly 2,000 years
>>1126118
> Simply put: In agrarian African societies without welfare it is economically smart to get 10 kids. In a highly specialized service economy with welfare kids are economical suicide.
That is extremely tortured logic meant to fit a political narrative rather than commentate on an objective truth
Agrarian societies have more children because more hands working the farm equals more profit for the parents. For a farmer more children means more labor that doesn't come with the need for a paycheck and nobody cares if you beat your children for having a problem with that, but you obviously can't do that to a free laborer.
In cosmopolitan societies there is immense social pressure to succeed and in order to actually successfully raise a child requires a tremendously large input of resources educating and preparing them for a fast paced society.
These patterns held true for a long, long time before the modern concept of a welfare state shows up. All the welfare state did was reduce the misery and desperation that has historically always plagued the urban poor.
>>1126153
Technically separation of church and state, but this is clearly not the meaning that is being used in the context of this conversation. We are talking about the influence of religion in a society in general, not just the state, thus the more correct term would probably be atheism, as opposed to religiosity.
>>1126178
>and yet classical Athens and the Roman Empire both experienced population decline
When and for what reasons again? Because of atheism?
>despite pre-dating industrialization by nearly 2,000 years
Too bad we're talking about modern societies which work completely different from ancient and medieval ones. In the ancient world up until the middle ages a simple drought or pest could cause a population decline.
>>1126178
>Agrarian societies have more children
>In cosmopolitan societies there is immense social pressure to succeed
I'm not sure I get what's your point anymore. In the beginning you seemed to be arguing that secularization is the cause of lower birthrates. But then all you cite as factors influencing birthrates are economic and social ones...
Well Buddah was a prince. Buddhists, Jains, and Materialists (Carvaka) debated ideas a lot. Like whether certain vegetation could suffer / be considered sentient. But there was not a great deal of of cross-conversion. Emperor Ashoka tried to have Buddhism catch on in India but ultimately failed, and failed to reform the caste system, because of the Brahminic priesthood. But the message was exported abroad and for whatever reason East Asians were more conducive possibly because Chinese Heaven Worship priests and monks didn't hold much influence.
>>1126178
>Agrarian societies have more children because more hands working the farm equals more profit for the parents. For a farmer more children means more labor that doesn't come with the need for a paycheck and nobody cares if you beat your children for having a problem with that, but you obviously can't do that to a free la
Name
Options
borer.
Which is exactly what i said.. Did you even read my post?
>>1126233
Also by welfare i mainly meant retirement. A big incentive to get a lot of kids in agrarian societies is that they guarantee your well being when you're old.
Obviously this is not a thing in the west.
>>1126205
>When and for what reasons again? Because of atheism?
When you find the definitive answer to that question, be sure to let the people in charge know. But it probably has more to do with realpolitik than identity politics such as what religion (or "belief system") a given group believes in.
>Too bad we're talking about modern societies which work completely different from ancient and medieval ones.
Do they?
>In the ancient world up until the middle ages a simple drought or pest could cause a population decline.
The Roman Empire, the Gupta Empire, and the Han Dynasty were all larger any drought or pest could have brought down. But they all experienced periods of population decline.
>I'm not sure I get what's your point anymore. In the beginning you seemed to be arguing that secularization is the cause of lower birthrates. But then all you cite as factors influencing birthrates are economic and social ones...
It was a mistake of me for failing to mention that I'm not the same guy, and I'm merely adding commentary exploring the sides of the issue rather than trying to prove that Christian societies are superior (or inferior, for that matter).
>>1126233
>Did you even read my post?
Yes and it was blatantly obvious that you were insinuating that the welfare state was the cause of decline, and my point is saying that's a giant load of hogwash because historical societies without welfare states experienced the same sort of deterioration
>>1122442
>the christards did the same
ah yes, those oppressive bigots not standing still so the animals could eat them in the Colosseum
also you forget the near endless holy wars in India between Indian faiths and latter Muslims as well
if anything Hinduism is far more violent as it extols war and killing as sacred
not that this is a bad thing
It's hilarious watching fedora fags try and blame Christianity for their having destroyed western civilization with their secularism and sodomy.
>n-no you're just like Isis we were right to destroy your civilization that gave us the freedom to spread our subversion
>y-youre just hypocrites it's your fault not mine!
Well I hope those thoughts provide you solace as Abdul saws your head off with a dull knife.
>>1123788
Remind yourself that Scripture is divinely inspired literature written by men. It is inerrant not infallible.
>>1126433
It is both inerrant and infallible. I cannot imagine something that is the former and not the latter. And again, the autographs.
>>1122442
This is the dumbest shit I've read all day
>>1122535
No they'd be a hypocrite if they went and forced people to convert then complained you fucking retard
>>1122419
Before the election of the very first pope:
>Brother: Have we started the fire?
>Pope: Yes, the fire rises!
>>1122442
/thread
>>1122465
>What happens with other religions that also have a written set of rules like Taoism and their Tao te Ching. Taoist although lax in some aspect, were (if any taoist survive) extremely moral people.
Philosophical Taoism is about anarchy, following nature / the Tao's flow, being as natural and simplistic as can, but - as you said - paradoxically they are very moral.
(Religious Taoism is just a meme, by the way. I don't even regard it as Taoism.)
>Also confucians had a rigid strict set of codes and moral customs.
Indeed.
One could even say that Confucianism is nothing more than a set of codes and moral customs.
It's literally the religion (philosophy? Depends.) of rules.
Taoists just laugh at these clowns.
It's like Taoists were Gnostics and Confucianists are the later Christians (not literally, of course).
t. A guy who has studied and practiced philosophical Taoism.
>>1124315
>>1124336
>Again, the treason of women and openness to exotic, foreign elements can't be underestimated in the decline of civilizations. We're living in the last days of the Roman Empire.
Is this relevant then?
>>1128673
Absolutely.
>>1122611
Learning arabic is pointless since all arabs around there are literally rocket scientists able to learn chinese in 5 minutes.
>>1126009
Low birthrates are caused by living standards. In the west they grew very, very fast which made them unsustainable and demanded from families to downsize.
Meanwhile communists never had this problem.
>>1126398
>ah yes, those oppressive bigots not standing still so the animals could eat them in the Colosseum
>people still believed this happened more then once or twice at most and even that's a stretch
Gotta love the delusional persecution complex you cretins possess.
>>1126398
>forgetting what the christfags did once they had power in Rome
Think about why did Romans persecuted only Christians, and little later Christians and Jews(after the latter went full REEEEEEEEEEEEE gentiles).
Normally they didn't care about religion at all.
There's very, very good reason for it.
>>1122827
Well he popularized the concept that onebearded perv in the sky approved of such activities done to those who deny the same imaginary God. Got is meant to be beyond human understanding, a vast unknowable entity that exists beyond mortal reckoning
>>1122419
>Where christians the original extremists?
Nah, the zealots have them beat if we're just talking about abrahamism alone.
If anything, the early christians were "just another damn eastern mystery cult" that happened to have the right sort of philosophy (uniting religious monotheism with greek customs by ditching all the jew stuff) to appeal to plebs.
If I were to compare them to something modern, it'd be akin to new religious movements, like Wicca, Asatru, or something like that.
>Infiltrated step by step the decadent roman world
Eh, not really. Christianity didn't have any political relevance until Constantine, and before that, most christians were garbage tier plebs and slaves.
The influence on constantine likely came simply from him being educated in philosophy (which at the time was bending towards monotheism) + being a greek (greece being an early center of christianity)...one conk on the head later on a battle field and he could very well have had an "in hoc signo vinces" sort of moment just from being surrounded by chi-rho bearing plebs all day, and rolled from there.
>When they finally took absolute power, they quickly ordered the destruction of their former enemies
eh, no worse than the persecution of christians and manichaeans under diocletian.
>Is this a constant with new religions?
no. It's consistent with how roman emperors deal with their enemies, though.
>>1122419
nope
Assyrians were fanatical as fuck over a 1000 years before Christians were around
>>1122419
>Where Christians the original extremists?
No, there were others way, way, way before.
History didn't really start in year 0, that's just a convention.
>>1128722
Catholics. Not Christians.
>>1126142
Spain is alredy the fifth most atheist country in the world (in terms of percentage of people who declare to not believe in god or any religion)
>>1130111
That's like saying ISIS are not muslims.
Fucking hypocrites.
