Thread 24655483

I was reading pic related and considering that Jesus may be real, but then I started reading Justine by De Sade and realized that I was wasting my time with this Christcuck nonsense.

>Words on a page have undue influence on his uncritical, malleable mind
You just take on the beliefs of the latest thing you’ve read. You’ll glance at a Chinese takeout menu and believe there’s a literal golden palace being erected next to the Quiznos.

>>24655483 (OP)
I keep telling myself that I want to read Guenon but every time I try it feels kind of pointless since I don't buy into the traditionalism schtick at all.

I read his Introduction to the Study of the Hindu Doctrines back in high school and it made me feel accomplished because I had just read my first ever philosophy book

But every time I try to read him now it just doesn't really jive with me and I give up. Evola was more entertaining to revisit than Guenon

>>24655524
>>24655524
try
>>24654598

>>24655507
I mean, can you refute this?

>>24655553
>God isn't real because you don't know why things happen
Uh okay man

>>24655566
I'm sure a kid suffering intense pain and then dying of cancer at 7 is part of God's mysterious plan and only He knows why that happened.

>>24655582
That's explained in chapter 1... you did read that, right?

>>24655483 (OP)
Meh. Even if you're not a christcuck, the book has enough historical/biographical value to be worth reading (imo)

t. stopped going to church after I got kicked off the band for turning up drunk a bunch of times

>>24655553
>Refute my circular logic
Saint Augustine’s God did not create a world of “chaos,” in the beginning. If you learned of the actual religion, instead of meandering through the drivel written by saints and atheists, you wouldn’t be having such quick changes of heart and learn to develop an actual worldview.

>>24655542
Yeah I've always wanted to read the Koran, this might be the sign I need...

I tried reading Augustine, but just could not relate to his world view at all.

>>24655642
That's called being dumb bro

>>24655483 (OP)
This book is so boring that I'm not surprised that someone would become an atheist halfway through lol.

>>24655582
I remember my grandpa talking about something similar after experiencing the loss of his dog when I was talking to him last thanksgiving, something like ‘he was just in pure pain’. It shocked me at the time because something I was thinking about then was the limits of pain and how it feels good to groan when you’re sick. I came to the conclusion before thanksgiving that it seemed to me people add this whole grand idea or dramatic meaning to pain based on their own fear, but there’s a simple limit to how much pain a person can feel before they pass out. And the nerve has a natural limit itself, so it can never be used as a totalizing concept. I always regret not explaining this to my grandpa about his dog screaming in pain, that it probably felt really good for it to to do that and that must be why it was doing it. But then again I almost lost my eye recently and was losing my vision and ability to focus my eyes, felt like my eyes were lose in my head, and when I’d go to bed at night I would see lights with my eyes closed and my eyelashes would scratch my face. I got scared the gas station was going to call the police thinking I was drunk because my eye was so blurry I couldn’t focus on him and was looking away from him so he wouldn’t notice. I’ve also had periods for a long time where I felt the sensation like my stomach disappeared by flushing into my upper intestine. Once you’ve been through stuff like that you kind of realize there’s a natural limit to pain and discomfort, and especially being sick almost feels pleasurable from the moaning and groaning and attention from the nurses. It’s also like if someone can manifest a real sickness in themselves it’s actually kind of impressive. I get that’s not really answering the heart of it because the real issue is either there’s a God who loves us, or were being attacked by this invisible natural force that’s taking all our love away and hurting us. Which is honestly quite a dramatic and external concept that I can’t really make sense of. Do people really love each other? Why would it matter to you if someone else gets sick? Not saying that it shouldn’t, but the kernel of that is very strange to try to break down. To me it has more to do with a Pagan concept of social order, some people really think that God loves us and wants the best for us in an external way. Which I guess makes sense because life and the evidence of it is all we know, particularly through interactions, but it also seems strange to me at the same time and somewhat sheltered. Not sheltered In a bad way, but it’s almost confusing to me. At the same time it’s clear that God does want the best for us in the sense where the question becomes what is the actual motivation for living. Well, it would have to be interaction, and then you could say how does that co-exist with this invisible force attacking us and taking our attention away.

>>24655582
>>24655819
Well then it becomes obvious that we made it all up for our concept of security. So then the question comes down to the nature of lies and lying. And then you would have to say that people were mislead by their own fallibility. But then the problem becomes how does this conception of security co-exist with the nature of pain and the totalizing concept of horror, why would it even be necessary? The whole idea becomes quite dramatic and mixed up with different people’s need for legitimacy and their own anxiety gets lost in all these poses of external security providing the most feeling of security. It’s quite dramatic. In which case it would have come down to one moment; Pascal’s wager, and the POSSIBILITY of revolution. People really forget the whole ‘wager’ part of Pascal’s argument and what it means. Pascal was specifically writing about a psychological gamblers logic, the moment right before the cards on the table flip, a stacking up of all the evidence, the reality of lies and the possibility of revolution. For me, it’s just a little too dramatic for my aesthetic sense. But then again maybe I don’t understand this external reality of interaction and the possibility of the ‘life I could have’. With that I would say it doesn’t really matter because it’s too dramatic to take genuinely. But then I remember Stavrogin, the possibility of revolution, or Versilov’s philosophical deism. But it’s clear to me that the looping fear of the Decembrist provided me a much greater sense of ecstasy from the simple fact of natural limits. The looping fear and the continuous ecstasy from conquering that fear seems much more impactful and meaningful and less dramatic. But then maybe I’m just not aware or conscious enough of the life I could live in the revolution of my own imaginations. At the same time, what does that mean for others? In that case it’s too dramatic for me to take serious in a genuine way. A different grandmother of mine also past away recently and my mom had some clergyman come to pray over her, during the meeting she got emotional about some uncanny significance when it came out that the nurse who came with him had some unrealized distant relation to her grandpa. She asked me after they left what I thought about that type of coincidence. I told her somewhat rudely that it was insignificant. Why? Because the whole ordeal was awkward and strained. And in fact at one point the nurse almost bluntly insulted the clergyman in a way that was hard for them to pick up on. After that it became clear to me that these processes cannot be ‘for us’ because at that point we would already be in a completely different nature if we could even conceive it, we would be instantly transported somewhere else.

>>24655582
>>24655819
>>24655835
It reminded me of the story the old man tells at the beginning of the movie The Sacrifice, about the monk following the process of watering a tree on a rocky mountain without ever being able to see it fully take hold. That doesn’t really seem that significant to me but it’s just something that’s clearly related to the strained experience of praying with the little clergyman. At one point I was certain that my aunt didn’t leave because it was so emotional, but that she couldn’t hold in her laughter. Then we go back to security, legitimacy, the life that people could live through this revolution of shedding all fallible lies. To me it’s just still too dramatic and external to mean any sort of significance. What possibility? What do they and me really want me to do with them in this revolution? How does it make sense? It is a sin to ask, to beseech. It’s a feather-headed dream for one reason. The only thing that’s ever delivered that imagination would have to be the capture of love I found in Venus and Adonis, and the authority of Arete in Zodiacus Vitae, and the cynical, scientific certainty in the Vitae that the only pinnacle experience could be the chance to speak to an alien (Palingenius’ angels). It seems to me that all this pain and revolution has a natural hard limit, and people forget that in their own external anxieties that I’ve never truly felt. Why haven’t I felt that? Because it’s only a gamblers logic that tries to compel me to act any differently. But why would I ‘believe’ in a lie when the cards are all stacked on one side? Do I act through my belief? No, the process is itself defined by not being for me. Why don’t I do what’s opposite of it for the possibility of my imagination? Do I not care enough to believe in the possibility of a revolution of behavior? Well I guess dramatically that would have to be a pathetic excuse. But realistically it doesn’t truly make much sense on the account of it being so fantastical. It’s hard to grip my own needs because the nature of it is defined by being external. I guess it could be pretty fun, this new world and new mythical dawn, but I’ve never been without the possibility of fun in the external world through the interest of people in me. It’s always been there. Well I guess it’s probably quite naughty that I’m disappointed by it, it’s immature. But why should I care about that? I guess it’s quite a small predicament, I’m not conscious enough of how good or how high level and illustrious life could become if I was aware of the possibility of ultimate interaction unfettered by all fallible lies. But people are so naturally dependent on their own security they would have to resist me in a strange and obscure way that would never be totalizing. My friends.

>>24655582
>>24655819
>>24655835
>>24655840
I would probably turn to manifesting some sort of giant ridiculous tumor on my head, and delight in the fact that the nurses would have to wait on it, and people I knew would feel obliged to have to come feel sorry for me while I lay there giving into my ultimate shame and groaning in front of them all. And the hum of the hospital machines and the lights at night, the old movies on the tv and the sound of people working in the hallway. I would walk out into the hallway at night in my gown holding onto my IV stand and try to listen in on the busyness of the day. A hospital room is a place surrounded by busyness and constant activity. And all the nurses have the blown up botox mommy faces and the expensive nails on their glorious hands. Sarcotheus, my father, and I limp after him in the same fashion in my gown. Trying to listen in on one last piece of news before the hospital lights shut off forever

>>24655483 (OP)
I was a semester into seminary when I lost my faith. Studying and understanding the faith, and by extension religion at large, is truly the greatest argument against apologetics. Almost every single clergyman, pastor, minister, whatever you want to call them, carries any genuinely belief for the book. I tried to grift after dropping out of "regular" college, but I couldn't. It felt deplorable.

>>24655844
boy I'm drunk
>carries any genuinely belief
I meant "Almost every single clergyman, pastor, minister, whatever you want to call them, does not carry any genuine belief for the book."
I apologize for my intoxication.

>>24655844
Hey I went to seminary school as well and dropped out. The more you read, understand and actually apply yourself to studying Christianity, Christian history and pre-Christian cultures around it, and then its early developments, the more a lot of it just seems like some generic agenda pulled together by various tribes needing political or just general soft power. It was a rather depressing period of my life lmao.
And you're right that almost nobody involved at that level seems to actually believe any of it. Especially if they grew up in the tradition. The real serious ones are almost always converts I've noticed which is quite odd.

Contrasting this with scholars, priests, holymen, monks, etc of other religions is pretty interesting as well.
Not to say I'm an atheist at all, but its obvious, to me at least, that Christianity had its well poisoned right from the start. Insert (((them))) comments.

>>24655628
God be giving signs out a diamond dozen

>>24655943
>...the more a lot of it just seems like some generic agenda pulled together by various tribes needing political or just general soft power.
Nothing was more damning than studying the Canaanites and the eventual birth of the Israelites. Making the connection that the Old Testament God is most likely a mashing together of multiple deities from the Canaanite Pantheon to appease and integrate cultures that were victims of conquest was very defeating.
>And you're right that almost nobody involved at that level seems to actually believe any of it. Especially if they grew up in the tradition.
I returned to the church that I was raised in and the clergy treated me much differently when they learned that I dropped out of seminary. I seemed to cause a palpable level of anxiety in them, I think they could tell that I was able to see things from their bleak perspectives. The figurative spell was lifted and I understood what the grift actually was.
>The real serious ones are almost always converts I've noticed which is quite odd.
I have noticed this as well. I think it's mostly because the church has given them a much better life than the life they had before. They only know the darkness prior and the hope after. They're still cult loyalists rather than administrators, despite holding rank. Churches benefit by having faculty that are complete and total believers, fanatics stir aspiration in the common member.

>Not to say I'm an atheist at all
I'm currently undecided. I struggle to believe that any human-made religion is correct, but I also cannot deny the possibility of metaphysical reality.

>>24655943
>seminary school
What actually occurs at these places? I always kinda figured a lot of the students were closeted theater types that didn't know what else to do with their lives. I saw a being of light one time while hungover and became learned something about eternity and now I can't get it out of my head despite being a secular biologist until my early 20s.

>>24655992
I'm >>24655844
The majority of students are there for the "bible college" factory. Their degree consists of rudimentary core subjects (to appease state standards), surface level theology, some form of social study/sociology/psychology, and public speaking. They probably take Spanish so they can live on a beach for "mission work" during the summer. They attend chapel a fuck ton, go to bed at curfew, marry a chubby brunette attending the music and worship program, and run off to a church where they live their life as a youth pastor or summer camp administrator. They pump out 3-5 children, and all of them repeat the cycle.

A select few students are interested in preaching, writing, and church organizing. Their coursework is more focused on church history, actual theology, they typically study Ancient Greek, and find themselves to be not much different from the secular literature students at the state university a half-hour away. Most go to grad school, where they specialize in one area of seminary study. Some reach for a PhD.

>>24656007
Oh they're those fuckers. They did not like me back in high school because I lacked something. Now that I know who you're talking about let me congratulate you on your decision to drop out. I can see why all the library time might kill their love as most of mine's only grown from toiling in shitty climates in isolated rural areas doing scientific work, and that I'm much more spiteful and pessimistic back in the modern suburb world of Americana. Have a pic of a frozen swamp for your reply.

>>24655628
I recommend you read it in backwards order of sections. That way you can follow the arguments like breadcrumbs. Alternatively you can start with #2, but it contains roughly half of all the material at least in part. So read that as if it were a book like John or Ecclesiastes. And read the rest as if they were like the epistles of Paul or Law of Moses. Indeed much of the Law of Moses is repeated.

Trust the Lord, he does not want to decrease you, but to increase your intelligence.

>>24655968
Verily the Book of Mormon is true, it is from ancient Africa, and it confirms the Bible and the Qur'an, which itself speaks of a certain Sabian people: these people are they who produced the civilizations remembered in the Book of Mormon.

>>24655628
You should read the New Testament first..

>I asked the earth, and it answered me, “I am not He”; and whatsoever are in it confessed the same. I asked the sea and the deeps, and the living creeping things, and they answered, “We are not thy God, seek above us.” I asked the moving air; and the whole air with his inhabitants answered, “Anaximenes was deceived, I am not God. “ I asked the heavens, sun, moon, stars, “Nor (say they) are we the God whom thou seekest.” And I replied unto all the things which encompass the door of my flesh: “Ye have told me of my God, that ye are not He; tell me something of Him.” And they cried out with a loud voice, “He made us.

Even atheists should be able to appreciate that

>>24655483 (OP)
No. Why would I quit reading a book just because I disagreed with it? You can learn things from writer's you disagree with.

>>24656077
The Bible as a whole is very intimidating to me lol, so big, but it's something I plan to read as well (probably not the whole thing though). Do you have any recommended reading order of the books?

>>24657589
Start with the Gospel of John and read straight through to the end.

>>24655483 (OP)
Don't mind me. Just crawling through your thread real quick.

>>24657589
John Mark Matthew Luke Acts Hebrews Paul Peter John James Jude Revelation
Jewish order for the Law and Prophets
Daniel