The JEW thread.

Do you have a dumb political opinion? Do you want other people to know about your dumb political opinion? Look no further!
User avatar
ArcaneLurker
Posts: 314
Joined: Feb 6, '24

Post by ArcaneLurker »

aweigh wrote: February 11th, 2024, 03:10

I keep things simple. I unironically believe in God just to own the libs.
What if it's a theist lib?
User avatar
KnightoftheWind
Posts: 1369
Joined: Feb 27, '23

Post by KnightoftheWind »

Liberals never believe in God unironically, if they're not insufferable reddit atheists they claim they are "heckin' spiritual!" which means absolutely nothing.
User avatar
ArcaneLurker
Posts: 314
Joined: Feb 6, '24

Post by ArcaneLurker »

KnightoftheWind wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:14
Liberals never believe in God unironically, if they're not insufferable reddit atheists they claim they are "heckin' spiritual!" which means absolutely nothing.
There are more "progressive" Christians than the reverse. Religious Jews are also progressive. There are even moderate Muslims I would consider to be libs.
I don't know whether it's ironic or not, but I suppose I can't imagine a Lesbian Pastor/ Priest getting annoyed at someone for being an atheist.

Freemasonry is very theistic, dogmatic and religious, and they apparently look down on atheists, but it's not the same.
Last edited by ArcaneLurker on February 11th, 2024, 05:31, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
KnightoftheWind
Posts: 1369
Joined: Feb 27, '23

Post by KnightoftheWind »

Would you call melted ice cream "ice cream"?, or a steak that's been burnt to a crisp "steak"?. I do not call "progressive" Christians "Christians", because they aren't. They cloak themselves in a very thin-garb of Christianity, but preach an entirely different message.
User avatar
ArcaneLurker
Posts: 314
Joined: Feb 6, '24

Post by ArcaneLurker »

KnightoftheWind wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:30
Would you call melted ice cream "ice cream"?, or a steak that's been burnt to a crisp "steak"?. I do not call "progressive" Christians "Christians", because they aren't. They cloak themselves in a very thin-garb of Christianity, but preach an entirely different message.
I am using the accepted definition for theism.
If they say they believe in a Goddess, or Supreme Androgyne, that's theism.
User avatar
Vergil
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sep 6, '23

Post by Vergil »


Last edited by Vergil on February 11th, 2024, 05:51, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
KnightoftheWind
Posts: 1369
Joined: Feb 27, '23

Post by KnightoftheWind »

ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:33
KnightoftheWind wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:30
Would you call melted ice cream "ice cream"?, or a steak that's been burnt to a crisp "steak"?. I do not call "progressive" Christians "Christians", because they aren't. They cloak themselves in a very thin-garb of Christianity, but preach an entirely different message.
I am using the accepted definition for theism.
If they say they believe in a Goddess, or Supreme Androgyne, that's theism.
Then that's even more fake and gay.
User avatar
jcd
Posts: 334
Joined: May 30, '23

Post by jcd »

KnightoftheWind wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:30
Would you call melted ice cream "ice cream"?, or a steak that's been burnt to a crisp "steak"?. I do not call "progressive" Christians "Christians", because they aren't. They cloak themselves in a very thin-garb of Christianity, but preach an entirely different message.
That's funny because you could say the same about christian and "orthodox" larpers on this very forum
User avatar
Vergil
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sep 6, '23

Post by Vergil »

jcd wrote: February 11th, 2024, 10:53
KnightoftheWind wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:30
Would you call melted ice cream "ice cream"?, or a steak that's been burnt to a crisp "steak"?. I do not call "progressive" Christians "Christians", because they aren't. They cloak themselves in a very thin-garb of Christianity, but preach an entirely different message.
That's funny because niggers tongue my anus.
:scratch:
User avatar
WhiteShark
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 1439
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Post by WhiteShark »

ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 03:18
aweigh wrote: February 11th, 2024, 03:10

I keep things simple. I unironically believe in God just to own the libs.
What if it's a theist lib?
Some libs may believe in a god but they don't believe in God, so aweigh's point holds.
User avatar
Atlantico
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 912
Joined: Feb 23, '23

Post by Atlantico »

Kalarion wrote: January 26th, 2024, 16:22
have you ever read Hilaire Belloc's book, The Jews?
Ah that explains this character

Image

Is Raiders the most butthurt Spielberg movie or what
User avatar
maidenhaver
Posts: 3508
Joined: Apr 17, '23
Location: ROLE PLAYING GAME

Post by maidenhaver »

Atlantico wrote: February 11th, 2024, 14:03
Kalarion wrote: January 26th, 2024, 16:22
have you ever read Hilaire Belloc's book, The Jews?
Ah that explains this character

Image

Is Raiders the most butthurt Spielberg movie or what
Had nothing to do with Hillary Belloc.
User avatar
Atlantico
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 912
Joined: Feb 23, '23

Post by Atlantico »

maidenhaver wrote: February 11th, 2024, 15:06
Atlantico wrote: February 11th, 2024, 14:03
Kalarion wrote: January 26th, 2024, 16:22
have you ever read Hilaire Belloc's book, The Jews?
Ah that explains this character

Image

Is Raiders the most butthurt Spielberg movie or what
Had nothing to do with Hillary Belloc.
Well you made words on the keyboard appear on the screen. I suppose a participation trophy is in order :toot:
User avatar
jcd
Posts: 334
Joined: May 30, '23

Post by jcd »

Nammu Archag wrote: February 11th, 2024, 15:03
Image
Crazy, I don't see this counter here: https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/statistics/
User avatar
Thor Kaufman
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 533
Joined: Feb 6, '23
Location: Antisymmetrical

Post by Thor Kaufman »

ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:33
KnightoftheWind wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:30
Would you call melted ice cream "ice cream"?, or a steak that's been burnt to a crisp "steak"?. I do not call "progressive" Christians "Christians", because they aren't. They cloak themselves in a very thin-garb of Christianity, but preach an entirely different message.
I am using the accepted definition for theism.
If they say they believe in a Goddess, or Supreme Androgyne, that's theism.
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:25
KnightoftheWind wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:14
Liberals never believe in God unironically, if they're not insufferable reddit atheists they claim they are "heckin' spiritual!" which means absolutely nothing.
There are more "progressive" Christians than the reverse. Religious Jews are also progressive. There are even moderate Muslims I would consider to be libs.
I don't know whether it's ironic or not, but I suppose I can't imagine a Lesbian Pastor/ Priest getting annoyed at someone for being an atheist.

Freemasonry is very theistic, dogmatic and religious, and they apparently look down on atheists, but it's not the same.

Tbf everyone is religious. The question is just what you make your god. The real God, the christian one. Or Satan, which is everything else in different forms, be it self-worship, libertarianism, scientism, Hinduism/Yoga, Buddhism, Freemasonry (which is judaism for the goy), Islam, Judaism or other Cainite crap
User avatar
ArcaneLurker
Posts: 314
Joined: Feb 6, '24

Post by ArcaneLurker »

Thor Kaufman wrote: February 11th, 2024, 17:38
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:33
KnightoftheWind wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:30
Would you call melted ice cream "ice cream"?, or a steak that's been burnt to a crisp "steak"?. I do not call "progressive" Christians "Christians", because they aren't. They cloak themselves in a very thin-garb of Christianity, but preach an entirely different message.
I am using the accepted definition for theism.
If they say they believe in a Goddess, or Supreme Androgyne, that's theism.
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:25
KnightoftheWind wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:14
Liberals never believe in God unironically, if they're not insufferable reddit atheists they claim they are "heckin' spiritual!" which means absolutely nothing.
There are more "progressive" Christians than the reverse. Religious Jews are also progressive. There are even moderate Muslims I would consider to be libs.
I don't know whether it's ironic or not, but I suppose I can't imagine a Lesbian Pastor/ Priest getting annoyed at someone for being an atheist.

Freemasonry is very theistic, dogmatic and religious, and they apparently look down on atheists, but it's not the same.

Tbf everyone is religious. The question is just what you make your god. The real God, the christian one. Or Satan, which is everything else in different forms, be it self-worship, libertarianism, scientism, Hinduism/Yoga, Buddhism, Freemasonry (which is judaism for the goy), Islam, Judaism or other Cainite crap
I would agree that "religiosity" can be apparent in the supposedly non-religious, but there are genuine atheists, or people who just don't even think about Gods or existential issues at all.
It's just that I can see that many people that grow up in puritanical or strict Christian homes, and then become disillusioned, due to the pressures, and then flip into becoming hysterical Communists & Satanists. They retain the same mentalities or behaviours, the same dependency on a religious/ ideological 'tribe', but their loyalties & worldviews shift in opposition to their parents. That being said, I can admit that a lot of the French Socialist/ Communist figureheads were not really Atheistic, despite promoting militant Atheism, they were obviously interested in the occult. I also posted in one of your threads about how Freemasonry is Jewish. Not sure if you saw.

Deism is coming to the conclusion there must be a God through logical assessment of reality. A Catholic theist would see this as heretical, as their faith is derived from studying Jewish texts.
You're not the only one to make an absolutist claim, Muslims would also say a similar thing, you're only worshipping Allah or you're under Satan, so there needs to be more to your assertion (to differentiate from others and justify your position), because, to me, Allah seems like a Canaanite God or Demiurge figure, when you read what Muslims actually believe.

I suppose my main issue here is that a lot of RW Christians propose that Science Academia is Materialistic, and not spiritual enough, but from my perspective, they're too 'spiritual' in that they prioritise ideals & sentiments over harsh, objective truth & logical assessment, and it's the Race Realists that are materialistic. A Kabbalist gnostic may be able to recognise certain facets of reality, but they may see them as something to overcome and change, even if it's against the will of the masses... like Transhumanism.
Last edited by ArcaneLurker on February 11th, 2024, 17:57, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
WhiteShark
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 1439
Joined: Feb 2, '23

Post by WhiteShark »

ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 17:51
I would agree that "religiosity" can be apparent in the supposedly non-religious, but there are genuine atheists, or people who just don't even think about Gods or existential issues at all.
This isn't atheism, it's agnosticism of the soft variety: "I don't know," frequently followed by, "and I don't care." This sort of person tends to either make a religion of worshipping himself, or is still groping his way towards something more substantial.
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 17:51
Deism is coming to the conclusion there must be a God through logical assessment of reality. A Catholic theist would see this as heretical, as their faith is derived from studying Jewish texts.
On the contrary, arguments for the existence of God from nature and logical necessity are as old as Christianity itself. Paul writes in Romans that God is evident in nature, the same exact argument a deist would make:
The Epistle of Saint Paul to the Romans, Chapter 1, Verses 19-20 wrote:
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
The difference is that Christians have the historical record of God's revelation to the world, which means a greater knowledge of His person and will.
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 17:51
You're not the only one to make an absolutist claim, Muslims would also say a similar thing, you're only worshipping Allah or you're under Satan, so there needs to be more to your assertion (to differentiate from others and justify your position), because, to me, Allah seems like a Canaanite God or Demiurge figure, when you read what Muslims actually believe.
I'm not going to set out to prove the Christian position in this post, but to explain it.

Given their contradictions, there are only two possible answers regarding religions: either one is right, or none are right. Obviously, it's impossible for Christianity and Islam to both be right about the nature of God and other religions. The same goes for Gnosticism, Paganism, and so on. Calling Allah a Canaanite god or demiurge is an implicit acknowledgement of the truth of paganism or gnosticism to the exclusion of all other religions.

From that, it's easy to see why Christianity would say that all othe religions are ultimately forms of devil worship. If there can be at most one true religion, then the rest are false. If they are false, then worship in those religions has an object other than the Christian God. The Christian worldview does not have any third-party spirits or neutral entities. Spiritually, one is either oriented towards God or the devil, either towards the Source of all Good or the father of lies. Allah may not be literally the devil, just as Ba'al, Remphan, and Moloch may not be, but from the Christian standpoint they are at best non-existent and at worst demons, and thus worship of them points away from God and flows towards the devil.

Whether this is the correct view rests entirely on Jesus Christ. If He is the Son of God, as He claimed, and worked the miracles recorded in the Gospels, there can be no dispute. That's what Christianity believes, and such leaves no room for competing claims.
User avatar
ArcaneLurker
Posts: 314
Joined: Feb 6, '24

Post by ArcaneLurker »

WhiteShark wrote: February 11th, 2024, 18:33
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 17:51
I would agree that "religiosity" can be apparent in the supposedly non-religious, but there are genuine atheists, or people who just don't even think about Gods or existential issues at all.
This isn't atheism, it's agnosticism of the soft variety: "I don't know," frequently followed by, "and I don't care." This sort of person tends to either make a religion of worshipping himself, or is still groping his way towards something more substantial.
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 17:51
Deism is coming to the conclusion there must be a God through logical assessment of reality. A Catholic theist would see this as heretical, as their faith is derived from studying Jewish texts.
On the contrary, arguments for the existence of God from nature and logical necessity are as old as Christianity itself. Paul writes in Romans that God is evident in nature, the same exact argument a deist would make:
The Epistle of Saint Paul to the Romans, Chapter 1, Verses 19-20 wrote:
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
The difference is that Christians have the historical record of God's revelation to the world, which means a greater knowledge of His person and will.
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 17:51
You're not the only one to make an absolutist claim, Muslims would also say a similar thing, you're only worshipping Allah or you're under Satan, so there needs to be more to your assertion (to differentiate from others and justify your position), because, to me, Allah seems like a Canaanite God or Demiurge figure, when you read what Muslims actually believe.
I'm not going to set out to prove the Christian position in this post, but to explain it.

Given their contradictions, there are only two possible answers regarding religions: either one is right, or none are right. Obviously, it's impossible for Christianity and Islam to both be right about the nature of God and other religions. The same goes for Gnosticism, Paganism, and so on. Calling Allah a Canaanite god or demiurge is an implicit acknowledgement of the truth of paganism or gnosticism to the exclusion of all other religions.

From that, it's easy to see why Christianity would say that all othe religions are ultimately forms of devil worship. If there can be at most one true religion, then the rest are false. If they are false, then worship in those religions has an object other than the Christian God. The Christian worldview does not have any third-party spirits or neutral entities. Spiritually, one is either oriented towards God or the devil, either towards the Source of all Good or the father of lies. Allah may not be literally the devil, just as Ba'al, Remphan, and Moloch may not be, but from the Christian standpoint they are at best non-existent and at worst demons, and thus worship of them points away from God and flows towards the devil.

Whether this is the correct view rests entirely on Jesus Christ. If He is the Son of God, as He claimed, and worked the miracles recorded in the Gospels, there can be no dispute. That's what Christianity believes, and such leaves no room for competing claims.
It's agnosticism and people that are conformist enough to go along with whatever Academia says, which is Atheism. The distinction I'm making is a belief in some form of deity or the supernatural, and those that are genuinely confident that no such thing exists. Even in the latter group, there are people whom treat their ideological cliques and political groups with the same reverence & prioritisation that a cultist would show their own religious group.

Theism prioritises the text and uses that to define their beliefs regarding God so when there is a contradiction, and he finds something in nature that he didn't expect, from his interpretation of texts, he favours the text. You'd think that believing in a creator requires someone to confront the realities of nature, but look at all the blind universalists that don't seem to understand that life was created with disparity, inequalities, and therefore conflict, that God would have had to create a system that led to races/ species. Deists do not depend on any one religious book for their beliefs, this means they have no strong rudder or aim, but they're also not going to be shaken by analysis of any texts/ interpretations.

I think your answer here needs work. The Catholics that have the longest record have also been thoroughly corrupted, to the point of the Vatican & Pope becoming a joke. The Russian Orthodoxy was also set up by KGB. The Bible says that when his followers fracture, and there is conflict, the most correct will triumph over the others, yet we see a chaotic mix of sects showing no signs of resolution. When I compare the majority of Christians beliefs to the actual texts, there are a lot of things that Christians ignore. There isn't a single sect I could say has a coherent interpretation/ worldview.

I'm saying Muslims are Gnostics that worship their demiurge instead of rebelling against the figure. Similar to Jews, except many of them seem to be rebelling whilst pretending to be like Muslims, trying to 'pull the wool over' their God's eyes with loopholes and stupid rituals, they see themselves, their bloodlines as uniquely divine and equal to 'Hashem,' and therefore it's their right to contend with him... or something like that.
I find that Christianity is in conflict with many aspects of nature, as well as contradicting itself in many regards.
I understand your perspective, but you're making absolutist claims and expecting others to respect them more than other claims. There needs to be more substance, proof of divine providence, or at least, proof that your group can do something that no others can.
Last edited by ArcaneLurker on February 11th, 2024, 19:27, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Rand
Posts: 1146
Joined: Sep 4, '23
Location: On my last legs

Post by Rand »

Thor Kaufman wrote: February 11th, 2024, 17:38
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:33
KnightoftheWind wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:30
Would you call melted ice cream "ice cream"?, or a steak that's been burnt to a crisp "steak"?. I do not call "progressive" Christians "Christians", because they aren't. They cloak themselves in a very thin-garb of Christianity, but preach an entirely different message.
I am using the accepted definition for theism.
If they say they believe in a Goddess, or Supreme Androgyne, that's theism.
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:25
KnightoftheWind wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:14
Liberals never believe in God unironically, if they're not insufferable reddit atheists they claim they are "heckin' spiritual!" which means absolutely nothing.
There are more "progressive" Christians than the reverse. Religious Jews are also progressive. There are even moderate Muslims I would consider to be libs.
I don't know whether it's ironic or not, but I suppose I can't imagine a Lesbian Pastor/ Priest getting annoyed at someone for being an atheist.

Freemasonry is very theistic, dogmatic and religious, and they apparently look down on atheists, but it's not the same.

Tbf everyone is religious. The question is just what you make your god. The real God, the christian one. Or Satan, which is everything else in different forms, be it self-worship, libertarianism, scientism, Hinduism/Yoga, Buddhism, Freemasonry (which is judaism for the goy), Islam, Judaism or other Cainite crap
I just don't find ANY of it believable. So I guess that kinda destroys your thesis.
Religion is what religious people do, true. Whether they believe in supernatural or philosophical stuff.
Some of us do not care about any of it, from any source. Because it all seems to not reflect reality.
But, of course, theists don't listen to what people say about what they think. Because the theist always seems to think they know better.
Last edited by Rand on February 11th, 2024, 21:05, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Thor Kaufman
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 533
Joined: Feb 6, '23
Location: Antisymmetrical

Post by Thor Kaufman »

ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 17:51
Thor Kaufman wrote: February 11th, 2024, 17:38
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:33


I am using the accepted definition for theism.
If they say they believe in a Goddess, or Supreme Androgyne, that's theism.
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:25

There are more "progressive" Christians than the reverse. Religious Jews are also progressive. There are even moderate Muslims I would consider to be libs.
I don't know whether it's ironic or not, but I suppose I can't imagine a Lesbian Pastor/ Priest getting annoyed at someone for being an atheist.

Freemasonry is very theistic, dogmatic and religious, and they apparently look down on atheists, but it's not the same.

Tbf everyone is religious. The question is just what you make your god. The real God, the christian one. Or Satan, which is everything else in different forms, be it self-worship, libertarianism, scientism, Hinduism/Yoga, Buddhism, Freemasonry (which is judaism for the goy), Islam, Judaism or other Cainite crap
I would agree that "religiosity" can be apparent in the supposedly non-religious, but there are genuine atheists, or people who just don't even think about Gods or existential issues at all.
It's just that I can see that many people that grow up in puritanical or strict Christian homes, and then become disillusioned, due to the pressures, and then flip into becoming hysterical Communists & Satanists. They retain the same mentalities or behaviours, the same dependency on a religious/ ideological 'tribe', but their loyalties & worldviews shift in opposition to their parents. That being said, I can admit that a lot of the French Socialist/ Communist figureheads were not really Atheistic, despite promoting militant Atheism, they were obviously interested in the occult. I also posted in one of your threads about how Freemasonry is Jewish. Not sure if you saw.

Deism is coming to the conclusion there must be a God through logical assessment of reality. A Catholic theist would see this as heretical, as their faith is derived from studying Jewish texts.
You're not the only one to make an absolutist claim, Muslims would also say a similar thing, you're only worshipping Allah or you're under Satan, so there needs to be more to your assertion (to differentiate from others and justify your position), because, to me, Allah seems like a Canaanite God or Demiurge figure, when you read what Muslims actually believe.

I suppose my main issue here is that a lot of RW Christians propose that Science Academia is Materialistic, and not spiritual enough, but from my perspective, they're too 'spiritual' in that they prioritise ideals & sentiments over harsh, objective truth & logical assessment, and it's the Race Realists that are materialistic. A Kabbalist gnostic may be able to recognise certain facets of reality, but they may see them as something to overcome and change, even if it's against the will of the masses... like Transhumanism.
I have neither leisure nor energy to go through threads. If you want me to see something specifically or have a question or anything just @me

re atheism
Image
► Show Spoiler
I'm saying Muslims are Gnostics that worship their demiurge instead of rebelling against the figure. Similar to Jews
I thought you might have meant that but asked the question in a devil's advocate kind of veiled way. And I agree with you. Same on your jew take.

I find that Christianity is in conflict with many aspects of nature, as well as contradicting itself in many regards.
Supposedly Orthodox Christians, especially ROCOR (origin from Byzantium) claim they have the unbroken link and basically were what Catholicism originally was, before the Schism.

They may be right. I never liked the idea of the Papacy, nevermind the Vatican and its symbols and influence etc. Let's not even talk about Vatican I and God beware II. Just claiming the seat of God is on Earth in itself is absolutely heretical imo. Ykwim, the current "trustee" of Earth is the false lightbearer.
Orthodoxy also says you need not just the texts, sola scriptura fallacy which I completely agree with but also those who know the ancient rituals. Mind you, I am kind of an iconoclast, there is a lot of weird shit going on in Orthodoxy, not just the icon kissing that makes me wary.
Last edited by Thor Kaufman on February 12th, 2024, 05:21, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Thor Kaufman
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 533
Joined: Feb 6, '23
Location: Antisymmetrical

Post by Thor Kaufman »

Rand wrote: February 11th, 2024, 21:03
Thor Kaufman wrote: February 11th, 2024, 17:38
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:33


I am using the accepted definition for theism.
If they say they believe in a Goddess, or Supreme Androgyne, that's theism.
ArcaneLurker wrote: February 11th, 2024, 05:25

There are more "progressive" Christians than the reverse. Religious Jews are also progressive. There are even moderate Muslims I would consider to be libs.
I don't know whether it's ironic or not, but I suppose I can't imagine a Lesbian Pastor/ Priest getting annoyed at someone for being an atheist.

Freemasonry is very theistic, dogmatic and religious, and they apparently look down on atheists, but it's not the same.

Tbf everyone is religious. The question is just what you make your god. The real God, the christian one. Or Satan, which is everything else in different forms, be it self-worship, libertarianism, scientism, Hinduism/Yoga, Buddhism, Freemasonry (which is judaism for the goy), Islam, Judaism or other Cainite crap
I just don't find ANY of it believable. So I guess that kinda destroys your thesis.
Religion is what religious people do, true. Whether they believe in supernatural or philosophical stuff.
Some of us do not care about any of it, from any source. Because it all seems to not reflect reality.
But, of course, theists don't listen to what people say about what they think. Because the theist always seems to think they know better.
That is fine. You are free to believe what you want. And you believing something does not destroy anything what I said.
Not going to argue. God bless.
User avatar
KnightoftheWind
Posts: 1369
Joined: Feb 27, '23

Post by KnightoftheWind »

Icons are not worshipped in Orthoodxy, they are venerated, and there is a world of difference. The icons themselves are depictions of the heavenly reality, where the Son of God, the Blessed Virgin, and the Saints are drawn as they were meant to. Through Christ, we are given an opportunity to depict the incarnate, and that's where the Catholics made a grave error. For some reason they insisted on depicting God Himself as an old man, which may have roots in old Roman paganism and it's depictions of zeus-like figures. These are where the modern reddit memes of "sky daddy" come from, and is one of many things they have gotten wrong over the centuries.
User avatar
Thor Kaufman
Turtle
Turtle
Posts: 533
Joined: Feb 6, '23
Location: Antisymmetrical

Post by Thor Kaufman »

Irenaeus wrote: February 14th, 2024, 19:54
Image
Image
Post Reply