Does Nishitani fix the crisis of meaning of the godless Western world?

No. It’s mental masturbation for godless losers too lazy to face the Cross.

>muh crisis of meaning
Nishitani’s “emptiness” is a cheap knockoff of Pascal’s abyss, but without the balls to point to God as the answer. His whole shtick is just repackaged Eastern mysticism for atheists too spineless to commit to anything real.

>but muh modernity, muh science
Fuck off. Science doesn’t answer “why.” It measures how fast your soulless husk decays. Nishitani’s attempt to fuse Buddhism with Western existentialism is a limp-dick compromise that satisfies nobody. You want meaning? Kneel, repent, and beg Christ for mercy before you’re dust. Anything less is just larping as a sage while the world burns.

>>17799091
>muh Christ is the answer
You mean the same Christ whose name was used to justify crusades, inquisitions, and colonization? The same God who stayed silent while the world bled? Spare me. Clinging to a cosmic daddy figure doesn't make you courageous.

>>17799178
Christ’s truth isn’t judged by sinners twisting His name. Judge it by the saints, martyrs, and cathedrals that outlast your edgy whining.

>The same God who stayed silent while the world bled?
>muh problem of evil
Boo-hoo, God didn’t hold your hand through history’s shitshow. Free will means humans fuck up, retard. God’s not your nanny. He gave you a Church, Scripture, and reason. Use them or keep crying about suffering like a nihilist bitch. Nishitani’s “nothingness” doesn’t answer evil either; it just tells you to vibe with it. Lame.

>Clinging to a cosmic daddy figure doesn't make you courageous
Says the guy hiding behind Eastern mysticism to dodge commitment. Kneeling to Christ takes more balls than your spineless “everything is nothing” cope. Catholicism built civilizations. What’s Nishitani got? Some navel-gazing essays for pretentious losers. Get on your knees and face reality, or keep jerking off to void. Your choice, coward.

>>17799178
>mean the same Christ whose name was used to justify crusades, inquisitions, and colonization?
All of which were good, btw.

>>17799197
>only judge my religion by its good adherents (not that i'd ever be generous to other faiths)
>god will leave you to suffer because ??????
>god left you one religion out of many and expects you to pick the right one or else
>look at the material successes of some old now-extinct civilizations. that means they were 100% correct in their understanding of the nature of the universe
And Christians wonder why their religion is dying in the West

>>17799492
>>only judge my religion by its good adherents
Judge the adherents by the standards of their own religion. If they don't live up to their own religion's rules, then they're not a good representative of that religion.
>>god will leave you to suffer because ??????
Because He wants to make you holy. Suffering leads to holiness.
>>god left you one religion out of many and expects you to pick the right one or else
No, it's made very clear which one is the true religion, it's not like God said:
>Here's a bunch of religions, one of them is the correct one, take a guess!
Christianity is the one true religion, outside of Christ there is no salvation.
>>look at the material successes of some old now-extinct civilizations. that means they were 100% correct in their understanding of the nature of the universe
No one has ever said this, but obviously the fact tha they had material successes means that they were doing something right.

>>17799504
>Suffering leads to holiness
Not necessarily. Suffering tends to ruin people
>No, it's made very clear which one is the true religion
>Christianity is the one true religion, outside of Christ there is no salvation.
Of course you'd think that, everyone believes they hold the "true" religion simply by virtue of them believing it. Your snake oil is little different

By the way, which subset of Christianity is true then? Each denomination believes the others to be hell-bound heretics

>>17799537
>Not necessarily.
Yes necessarily, the more suffering you experience, the more holy you are. That is why the poor are the ones closer to God.
>Of course you'd think that
You asked a Christian, did you know? If you ask a Jew, they will tell you the same, same with a Muslim or a Buddhist, but no one would tell you that all religions have an equal chance to be the correct one and you just have to guess right, everyone would give you a clear answer to the question you're asking.
>Each denomination believes the others to be hell-bound heretics
Absolutely false, Catholics believe that Christ can bring salvation to others through some means, but the Church remains the repository of the entierty of the truth, the same with Orthodox Christians, Protestants believe that the one and only thing that you need to be saved is to believe in Christ, regardless of whatever other beliefs you hold, so long as you don't compromise on that one belief, you wil be saved, that's why there is such an amount of variation of beliefs between protestant denominations, but they all agree that everyone who believes in Jesus will be saved, the reason why they object to Catholics and Orthodox is because they believe that these groups put at risk their salvation by putting their trust on other things besides their faith in Christ to be saved, protestants wouldn't say that they're outright damend to hell, but are walking on thin ice.

>>17799547
I'm surprised by how modest your reply is
Well done, I'll concede