divination is white magic unless youre working with demons, I don't care what the Bible says. if prophets had the gift of dream interpretation, what is wrong with some tarot cards? i have experience with both.

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz i think the main reason is because divine revelation is from revelation/command from god -> you, it's not you -> god. however imo so much of protestant prosperity gospel falls into this camp, but basically i think what the bible was trying to say about divination is that if you try to treat god/divine revelation like a vending machine then it's bad

@shibao this is why I think its a sacred thing not to be treated lightly

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz the problem i have with almost all protestant churches is i don't see the relevant humility of christians, and instead i see a lot of arrogance. if you truly believe that the bible is 100% accurate and God is everlasting and unchanging and the righteous, jealous God of the old testament is still God, even if you might have a covenant with Jesus, you would never dare to even attempt to say "well actually this is what god said". like how can you believe that this is god and this is your god and then do the equivalent of "shush shush shush actually this is what you said". from a fundamentalist christian viewpoint a complete and utter respect, deference and fear (respect) should completely permeate your entire relationship with god but instead fundamentalist christians are always trying to prescribe things about god their entire sermons. and i still have brainworms from a fundamentalist christian upbringing, i don't know how you can believe in God but then with some magic handwavey Jesus NT covenant, basically disregard or reinterpret the bible, at that point just drop the act and admit that you're not a christian if you're trying to take a bible with the old testament (and new testament because he is eternal and unchanging) and instead construct your own cargo cult religion from that. "I don't believe in the Bible completely literally but I'm still christian because I agree with the morals" people feel like they have not thought one iota at all about their beliefs because how much of an absolute insult would it be to take one's divine commandment, reject it, and instead create a false imitation of it, it just doesn't make sense to me at all. but i am not a christian, so I'm making these observations outside of the church and personal revelation and relationship and all that.

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz i almost want to talk intellectually to a pastor about this because literally any pastor has probably said the phrase "actually, God/the Bible says" and I just don't see how that statement can ever be uttered in a sincere way with a proper (fundamentalist i guess) interpretation of Christianity. If God isn't absolute and almighty like that then great, you've turned God into Zeus. I guess the cop out answer is "because Jesus's sacrifice" but like, if you still believe in God then you would abstain from that anyways, just as you would not sin just because Jesus made it non-defenestrative to sin.

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz like i would have to have this conversation before even getting into any aspect of christian belief that a person has, because otherwise you can't say "xyz is for or against God" at all without prefacing with something like "this is just my personal belief as my falliable self works to better understand his unfalliable perfection and instruction" or something and if you say that this is implicit in your entire belief you could still not say this to anyone else as a prescriptive truth. so i guess i don't understand how any christian can have prescriptive absolute truth outside of divine interpretation or revelation

@shibao honestly I think the solution is just to say that the Bible isnt totally infallible, although God wrote a lot of it, some of it was adulterated by humans. they should just be honest and say that.

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz unfortunately that directly contradicts the new testament in several places and then you are back to not being a christian

@shibao reform movements are allowed to exist though

@shibao youre kind of being autistic about generating Christianity from first principles or whatever

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz i just don't see how from supposed christian epistemology, i'm just taking the bible (which is supposedly, if the bible is correct in itself about complete divine inspiration) as exactly akin to God's direct word (as divine inspiration says) so if you're not taking into account divine inspiration and the entire bible in it's entirety then you're rejecting God's word, I don't know how you can reject God's words, even if you could say you had personal divine revelation about it, then you're using God's word to reject God's word again, and I just don't know how that can be squared with someone supposedly being Christian

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz nvm i guess biblical infallibility allows for this

@shibao the parts of the Bible about the Bible being totally infallible are fallible. simple.

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz i mean, if that was totally inerrant then that could be true, but infallible means god's word was falliable

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz some would argue that taking god's word being completely infalliable and saying that it's falliable is the same as blaspheming against the holy spirit and thus being the unforgivable sin. even so the complete lack of fear for literally the worst sin that a christian could commit in any churches that don't uphold complete bibilical infallibility is mind boggling to me

@shibao Gods Word is perfect, the Bible is imperfect: partly Gods Word and partly not Gods Word. Partly man and partly God. if I were to break it down, the Torah being the oldest has the most human adulteration and Judean national myths, while the prophets who are later are more true to the people alleged to have spoken them. the writings which are even later are not even alleged to be divinely inspired. the New Testament would be the least dubious. Christ being God was infallible, but of course the New Testament wasnt written by Christ or even by prophets, it was written years later. if Christ is the Logos and reflects Gods Word completely, then the Q source if accurate would be totally infallible, but it hasnt been found. it really isnt hard to understand when you stop seeing the Bible as a monolith entirely from God. revelation is progressive and is perfect and entirely self consistent--its the Bible which doesnt entirely accurately reflect revelation.

@shibao @georgia

> try to treat god/divine revelation like a vending machine then it's bad

That's basically all prayers bar none. Even the Christian desire to be a good person and go to heaven, is transactional. You're not being a good person it for it's own sake, but because of what you'll get out of it, and the supposed eternal torture you'll avoid.

@toiletpaper @shibao renounce the fruits of your actions and devote every thing you do and experience as a sacrifice to God, and your sin can't touch you

@georgia

Fun fact: Tarot as a divination tool was first proposed by a French Huguenots (reformed Calvinist) pastor named Antoine Court de Gébelin, as a means of forecasting geopolitical dynamics.

https://archive.org/details/mondeprimitifana08cour

He even corresponded about it with Ben Franklin at least once.

https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-34-02-0181

@toiletpaper @shibao @georgia prayers don't do much other than make people feel good

@toiletpaper Etteilla, yeah :) I'm getting an etteilla based deck when benebel wen finishes it...

@Ree @georgia @shibao

Indeed. I think that's the point really. In the Vodou tradition I studied for several years, the main prayers were directed to my own higher self (essentially like the Jungian superego). The point being that they express aspirations and personal ideals, and the one being most capable of manifesting them in reality, is yourself.

@toiletpaper@shitposter.world @georgia@netzsphaere.xyz if I'm not mistaken, prayer is supposed to be a personal relationship with God through Jesus, not as a ritual to enable a transaction. i think relationships have to have some transactions by nature of being a relationship, but the important thing is that the relationship is not one sided if I had to guess

@Ree @shibao @toiletpaper miracles have happened to me even without prayer, of course prayer works then

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz you're basically just saying that the bible isn't divinely infallible, which is fine, maybe you can still claim that an earlier manuscript of the bible did exist and that one would be infallible but the current ones aren't, but if you don't believe that any bible was ever infallible then I don't know how you can call yourself a christian basically, that's basically just saying you disagree with god's word

@georgia @shibao

I'm not a Christian, so that kind of thinking has no relevance to me. Knowing about the history of a superstition, and subscribing to it as a belief system, are two different things.

@shibao youre being irrational. if you believe Jesus was the messiah you are by definition a Christian. biblical infallibility is not part of the definition.

@shibao@misskey.bubbletea.dev @georgia@netzsphaere.xyz god is infallible however the bible is written by man. (as per the discussion i had with my grandfather on this subject a long long time ago. he was an evangelist minister (not a fundie tho)).

no minister worth their salt would say "the bible said...", to reference another post in this thread. the ones that do are usually begging for donations on TV.

@purple@nya.social @georgia@netzsphaere.xyz so if you believe this, I don't get how a christian can allow or be okay with another supposed "christian" blaspheming against god. at the very least you have to say in a sermon that this is blasphemy

@shibao @georgia

Again, I'm not a Christian, so prayer has no such meaning in my personal practice. But put in context of my own perspective, I'd say the form of deity is really a stand-in for your own higher values and aspirations. The relationship you're developing is with your own ideal self which you hope to manifest through subsequent actions.

https://read.gov/aesop/038.html

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz this is what i'm saying, if you're a christian and you tell me this, you're basically saying that you're rejecting what is supposedly god's word as not god's word, so unless you have personal revelation from god directly on this matter I don't see how you can make this assertion and still consider yourself a christian

@shibao if the Bible isnt entirely Gods Word, then none of Gods Word is being rejected. you are operating by the axiom of total biblical infallibility, which is not axiomatic.

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz my thought is that if god is perfect then all of god and his word should have perfect principles even if they are too complex for humans to comprehend

@shibao @georgia cc @tyler any thoughts on this?

@shibao God is perfect, Gods Word is perfect. the Bible isnt entirely Gods Word.

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz okay I think I'm getting it, if you're saying that nothing is infallible outside of god himself or things he has directly created in the absence of the effects of sin, then basically nothing is blasphemy outside of personal revelation or whatever else you consider infallible to you. so i guess you could technically call this christianity, but in my mind you can either have this sort of total infallibility stemming from personal revelations, or a line of historical infallibilities (which I guess catholics extend from popes as papal infallibility) or total infallibility of the bible as god's word. but any sort of christian has to have complete respect for this chain of infallibilities in my mind, wherever it comes from god

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz and from this logic you could say that jesus might not be infallible because you got personal revelation or whatever directly from god and not need to believe in jesus or the trinity and still be considered christian, it would definitely need a new name then though

@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz well if god says it's true then it would have to be true, so i guess blasphemy probably only means denying what god has said to be true, thus why it's the unforgivable sin. i guess that's the bottom of that

No I don't have time right now but TLDR: A nigga either has the holy ghost or he doens't and if he's got it and listens to him, he'll figure it out, or if he doesn't, then he needs preaching

@dcc@annihilation.social @georgia@netzsphaere.xyz @tyler@nicecrew.digital another long chain of thoughts https://misskey.bubbletea.dev/notes/af5w1b6k3d

@tyler@nicecrew.digital i think that's basically the conclusion i came to as well lol

@georgia @shibao

"God" is a metasyntactic variable. It has no inherent meaning on it's own, but is entirely subject to the theology of the person(s) using it. Even within a single faith tradition like Christinanity the theology can vary widely resulting in mass murder over disagreement as to the minutia. Moreover the arguments that there's a singular conscious being at the end of the rainbow or whatever are all on pretty shaky ground. Which is why you have arguments like Russell's teapot, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, which by contrast are equally as well grounded in evidence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metasyntactic_variable

Another aspect people frequently overlook is that "faith" implies doubt. Faith is a coping mechanism which helps people hope for the best when all evidence is to the contrary. As such "faith" is incompatible with unshakeable "belief" (ie. opinion) which does not allow room for doubt. Given the mysterious nature of the world and our lack of true understanding of how it works or from whence it arose, belief in some absolute infallible answer to those questions is itself tantamount to wilful self-delusion.

@shibao the worst sin in Christianity is denying the Holy Spirit when youve personally experienced it or seen its miracles. blasphemy can be defined as like, saying anything negative about God or Jesus. I dont think saying "the Bible isnt entirely of God" is blasphemy.

@toiletpaper@shitposter.world @georgia@netzsphaere.xyz that makes sense, if i'm understanding you correctly, you're saying you can't have objective truth in anything that isn't wholly extending from god (or more accurately the metasyntactical variable) with divine inerrancy, and any other "beliefs" you have are just faith which could be wrong. so if you only believed in divine personal revelation with divine errancy then any true belief could only come from that

@georgia @shibao I agree with this interpretation. Denial of God as an unforgivable sin makes sense in the context of denying something you know to be true and divine, and knowingly pretending otherwise for whatever reason, often a personal gain.
If you were to have personal knowledge through revelation or as a direct witness of a certain scripture being directly written by God and you claimed otherwise, you would be sinning. If you only have fallible statements about the topic from other humans, and you're not personally certain of their truth, saying so isn't sinful, because you're not lying about it in any way.

Moses saying "nah these tablets aren't divine in origin it's all lies" would get him smitten, some random dude hearing fourth-hand about the tablets and saying "I heard that, but take it with a grain of salt it could just be some mountain weirdo carving stones for fun" would not be exactly offensive to the divine.

@nerthos @shibao oh I agree with you on that

@nerthos@shitposter.world @georgia@netzsphaere.xyz still though, a christian pastor claiming something from those tablets without the personal revelation or whatnot would be blasphemy would it not? I guess that's the main problem I have with most churches and christians

@nerthos@shitposter.world @georgia@netzsphaere.xyz *claiming something as objective truth without having a direct chain of infallibilities that point to it basically

@shibao @georgia I have to say from the start that I am not fond of pastors or the protestant dogma in general, for context.

I think you're right on this, in a certain way. I don't think it's blasphemy if the pastor truly believes it to be true and divine from his knowledge and feelings, and is simply making an statement of his faith in those words to anyone who will listen, in line with the idea of evangelization through the spread of the word.

I think it's blasphemy if the pastor, with nothing to go on save a copy of the bible printed by human hands and possibly several times translated and what he has heard from other humans, attempts to use the contents of the tablets as an implied threat of force as if God were a weapon, in an attempt to extort or coerce something from a second person; because he'd be blaspheming in claiming absolute truth without any actual backing of such, and by showing the hubris of attempting to wield God as a weapon while claiming to be a servant of God, which will probably be personally offensive to God if the old testament is a fair measure of his character.

@nerthos @shibao honestly wielding God as a weapon isnt Christlike so its not just disagreeable to Toraic sensibilities

@georgia @shibao I think there's some degree of leeway when it comes to using divine essence or the holy spirit as a spiritual weapon, against the spiritual enemies of man, but in the sense of channeling our connection to the divine, not by lawyering and threatening and instilling fear to act like some early industrial revolution factory owner's spoiled son telling a factory employee "if you don't give me your chocolate my dad will fire you"

@shibao@misskey.bubbletea.dev @georgia@netzsphaere.xyz oh they do. those folks are just as quick to bring out the hellfire and brimstone as they are to give you a cup of flour.

@shibao @georgia

> you can't have objective truth in anything

I would go so far as to say that the absolute objective truth is ineffable by nature. We simply cannot know it, period. Certainly not with such limited apparatus as the human mind/brain and our limited senses.

For instance, a cat or dog can see much better at night that a human. A snake can see in ultraviolet. All those creatures have much better chemical senses (smell, taste) than we do. The only way we can have an analogous range of abilities is to use technology which translates those phenomena into our range of senses (eg. displaying the info on a graph using visible spectra, etc).

We don't even know what we don't know. It's as if we're 2 dimensional beings existing in a 2 dimensional spacial plane, and trying to conceive of what it's like to experience 3 or more spacial dimensions. It's simply beyond the scope of our ability, period.

Even the things we do experience, are essentially illusions rendered inside our skulls. When you look up into the night sky and witness the splendour of the heavens, you're not actually witnessing it as it is, much less in it's totality. You're simply witnessing a limited hallucination reconstructed inside your brain from whatever limited information it's able to receive and process, then project into an illusory fabrication we think is the outside world. It's remarkable to think that all that splendour we perceive as such is actually inside us. What's outside of us, which we can never truly know, must therefore be all the greater and more magnificent.

To think that the totality of objective truth can be contained in a book itself composed of images which have to be filtered through the symbolic language processing centres of the brain and then refigured by imagination into some kind of ``meaning``, is ridiculous. Never mind whether it was man made or divinely inspired. It's simply farcical and hugely arrogant to think that ``meaning`` has any real substance beyond our limited cultural bound prejudices.

But as far as objective truth exists, the best tools we do have to get some semblance of it, are philosophy (not the least being epistemology and semiotics), and the scientific method (ie. falsifiability/falsification). That's still not going to yield the absolute ultimate infallible truth, but it will arguably get us steadily far closer than any other tools we have at our disposal. Maybe apart from art, which provides it's truth (limited though it is) by inspiring our imaginations and stirring us emotionally. Truth isn't really some final destination, but is a process, never to be fully completed.

@georgia @shibao I think much of how the bible is presented and catechesis in general addresses this: it is clearly stated the bible is a compilation of the writings of prophets and their witnesses, even the most direct parts are presented as "X of Y heard the voice of God and wrote it down as follows", and it's also why it's divided in books named after their corresponding prophets. it is not sold by anyone serious as "this was hand-written by God almighty", if you ever truly need direct infallible command from God he will tell you personally or through an emissary.

@shibao @georgia There's an interesting theory that the Bible actually has three "testaments" rather than two, and the overall tone of how God was regarded changed around the time of the Book of Daniel thanks to interactions with Zoroastrians after Babylon destroyed Jerusalem. Also, that Jewish influence provided the Persians with inspiration to incorporate their religion into governance rather than keeping the two separated and letting the religion be its own thing.

@shibao @georgia If you cut out Jesus from the equation you're abrahamic, not Christian. Which you can absolutely do if you want.

@georgia @shibao @nerthos what if God is a magic talking poptart

@nerthos @shibao @georgia the wild thing is that a vast majority of USA evangelicals believe that God actually did handwrite the Bible

@vriska @nerthos @shibao @georgia I believe god made skeletons

@vriska @shibao @georgia I mean many of those also think the world is 6000 years old and think circumsicion is a Christian thing. It happens with the Brazilian branch of evangelism too.

@vriska @nerthos @shibao the king James version in particular

@georgia @shibao @nerthos the worst version of the bible

@nerthos@shitposter.world @vriska@lizards.live @georgia@netzsphaere.xyz my school made us cross out millions and write down thousands in our textbooks but they got clowned on it for it and nowadays i hear it's a shitshow of a school

@shibao @georgia @nerthos lmfao holy shit that is embarrassing

@vriska @nerthos @shibao @georgia It's more along the lines of God puppeteering the author or channeling himself through their consciousness so they wrote his words down themselves, but yes. Our evangelicals are a special breed.

@nerthos @vriska @georgia @shibao Believe it or not, you're seeing that Brazilian prosperity gospel garbage start to take root in the US, particularly among Spanish-speakers

@georgia @vriska @shibao @nerthos kjv-onlyism is a fringe position among evangelicals, you will find ones who subscribe to it but my experience is that the average boomer evangelical who believes the bible is the literal inerrant word of god with no intermediaries in its construction will readily cite translations like the niv in support of their positions because they're too illiterate to understand the real implications of what they're saying

@georgia @vriska @shibao

@mrsaturday @georgia @shibao @vriska I completely believe it, Brazilian Evangelism is to Christianity what crack is to cocaine. It's a by-product tailored carefully to the most unfathomably stupid potential believers, the guys who won't question the part where they have to give 10% of their income to their pastor. They already have the translations to Spanish and the infrastructure from the 90s and 2000s when they tried to expand to bordering countries, so sending a few pastors with all of that to the USA is easy, especially with central american immigrants.
You'll get an English translation of it soon enough.

@georgia Tarot cards are for bitches and whatever bitches do is evil and demonic.

@mrsaturday @vriska @georgia @nerthos @shibao
Wew, I've been wondering lately how Sola Scriptura denominations square the whole "written by human hands" with the Infallible nature of the bible. But that would explain a lot of it, especially the ones who get so hung up on specific translations.

@shibao @georgia @vriska The funniest part of this is that they could simply have a member of staff censor the books beforehand but they went about it in the most insane way possible

@toiletpaper @shibao @georgia I can see why you'd see this in such a way from your anti-abrahamic pagan worldview, and many fake christians do indeed operate like that.

But the beautiful safety measure of Christian ascension theology, which is pretty clear to anyone who pays attention and actually understands what they're doing, is that treating this whole thing as transactional has the opposite effect. It's why there's no concerted effort to illustrate criminals on the mistake of their idea of "if I say I'm sorry in my deathbed I go to heaven", it's the great silent filter.
In Christianity, you go to heaven if you are good and observe God's law out of genuine love for both things, not if you do it to conform to the letter of the law. Jesus admonishes the pharisees for this directly, so even the bible tells you this in not-unclear terms

@nerthos@shitposter.world @mrsaturday@shitposter.world @georgia@netzsphaere.xyz @vriska@lizards.live i feel like joel olsteen started in the us before it started in brazil honestly

@nerthos@shitposter.world @georgia@netzsphaere.xyz @vriska@lizards.live nah it'd be like hundreds of books, easier to just make all the kids do it lol

@shibao @georgia @vriska @mrsaturday I honestly can't say for certain, I haven't looked into it too deeply and since I was born in '93 brazilian televangelists were just a thing for as long as I had any understanding of religion.

@shibao @georgia @mrsaturday @nerthos im against violence but that guy needs to get charlie kirked

@shibao @georgia @vriska Working in education having to deal with pointless stacks of paper is expected as part of the job, but good on them for figuring out a way to put the work on someone else, I wish the papers I have to fill could be filled by an underpaid intern ;)

@vriska @shibao @georgia @mrsaturday @nerthos im for violence and that guy needs to get Charlie kirked

@yohan @vriska @shibao @georgia @mrsaturday I'm from Buenos Aires and I say kill them all

@yohan @vriska @shibao @mrsaturday @nerthos I dont even know anything about him

@georgia @vriska @shibao @mrsaturday @nerthos dont need to

@nerthos @georgia @shibao

If you mean John 11 (eg. verse 42), or Matthew 23 (eg. verse 23), sure. But that doesn't say anything about ascending to heaven. On the other hand John 3:13 does say that Jesus alone ascends to Heaven, and John 3:16-18 clearly indicates the necessary transaction (belief in Jesus), failure to abide by which leads to eternal torture (apparently). The provenance of those `scriptures` is another matter though.

@toiletpaper @shibao @nerthos Elijah ascended to heaven

@nerthos @georgia @shibao

Another thing to consider is the Biblical covenant between Yahweh and the nation of Israel and Judah. The entire premise of being God's chosen people is based on their willingness to abide by the assigned contractual obligations. In other words, it's a transaction. Give Yahweh your exclusive obedience, and he won't torture your forever and ever.

@toiletpaper @shibao @nerthos Jews dont believe in eternal torment. originally they believed in Sheol and eventually they came to believe in resurrection

@vriska @georgia @shibao @nerthos i like the brobill

@georgia @shibao @nerthos

Not according to Jesus (per John 3:13). But what that's actually referring to is Merkabah mysticism (riffing off themes from Canaanite myths and astrolatry). Same as a bunch of other prophets (vaticinium ex eventu) including the Apocalypse John.

@toiletpaper @georgia @shibao And that's why the entire point of the new testament is "we're solving this fundamental problem in the theology through the messiah"

@nerthos @georgia @shibao

"The messiah" isn't even a real thing. First off, it's a term which applies to any/all kings and high priests in the line of David. It means they've been ordained (anointed) to fill that role within the government. Second, the supposed prophesy (Zechariah 6:13) is that there will be two, one high priest, and one king, who rule together side by side (as is ever the case regardless). Christians coopted the term, but apparently without even understanding it's correct cultural significance or place within the wider Biblical canon.

@toiletpaper @georgia @shibao See, I've already agreed somewhere else in the thread that scripture isn't infallible, and so has Georgia mentioned that the oldest scriptures are the most adulterated across the generations. I also believe that gods are shaped by men as much as men by gods, and certain deities have had many aspects over time, usually defined by specific events affecting their faithful and the theological consequences of it. But no amount of theological discussion will change the fact that you see YHWH as your enemy, so it's kinda pointless.

@nerthos @georgia @shibao

It's not Yahweh I see as my enemy. Certainly no moreso than Marvel's Spiderman is my enemy. What I see as my enemy is the rhetoric in the BuyBull which causes people to react with prejudice and violence towards people outside their faith group (such as Pagans, etc).

If that weren't the case I'd be happy to reciprocate mutual respect and tolerance as I do any other religious community or spiritual tradition. But since that's not the case, and so long as the literature continues to be promoted it will remain the case, I can only in good conscience regard it with the level of abject disdain it has amply earned.

Anyway, to understand the concept's of your own belief system, you should also look into the belief systems which heavily influenced the development of it's theology. For example...

Rebirth in John and the Hermetic Literature | M. David Litwa
https://youtu.be/cl_Y3ofrYjo

@toiletpaper @georgia @shibao For what it's worth I'm as opposed to the witch-hunting evangelicals you deal with as you are, IMO people's souls and the gods they worship are their own deal and they'll deal with the consequences of it themselves. Though I do think holy wars are a natural part of human existance and pretty much all faiths have done it in one or another way and North America is a particularly fanatical land in general.

I'm not a church-goer Christian, I like the theology and am heavily favoured by Him, but my relationship with God is not that of an usual follower so my interpretation of much of scripture isn't necessarily the same as others.

@nerthos @georgia @shibao

> I'm as opposed to the witch-hunting evangelicals you deal with as you are

But not enough to prevent you from promoting the same body of literature which repeatedly and consistently has lead to that activity over the past 2,000 years.

> holy wars are a natural part of human existance

As far as I'm aware the only ones who have a concept of "holy war" (ie. against non-believers) are Abrahamic superstitions. Feel free to show me an example otherwise (and where it's mandated in a relevant doctrine or scripture) which isn't simply an act of self-defence against Abrahamic aggression.

> my interpretation of much of scripture isn't necessarily the same as others.

In an earlier age you'd have been put to death, on the basis of your own scriptural tradition.

@toiletpaper @georgia @shibao I am opposed to the fake Christians causing all sorts of problems for the rest, not to the religion.

I don't think there's anything to gain in spending a massive amount of effort and time in trying to make a case when your ideas are already very cemented and at your age, you believe what you believe and live in a place by which your beliefs were informed.

>In an earlier age you'd have been put to death, on the basis of your own scriptural tradition.

If I had lived in some fanatical shithole sure, but my genealogy does not come from such places, I would have been perfectly fine discussing interpretation of scripture with the local priest.

@shibao @georgia @vriska @nerthos Oral Roberts was the first big parasite we had. He was a preacher but had someone airbrush the Rolex and gold rings out of his photos he'd take. He also scammed people by saying God was going to take him back to heaven if they didn't donate millions to him.

@nerthos @georgia @shibao

> the fake Christians causing all sorts of problems for the rest

I hear that a lot. It's a fallacy. The belief system has had 2,000 years to demonstrate it isn't just a glorified narcissistic doctrine of genocide veiled in insubstantial saccharine platitudes, and so far has utterly failed to do so.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

> trying to make a case when your ideas are already very cemented

Admittedly, you'll have a hard time convincing me that the Abrahamic trackrecord is other than it is. But as to anything else, I'm a perpetual student and always open to new and better information, even if it means having to change my mind accordingly.

> the local priest.

I sometimes consult the local Christian pastor too. But my reason for doing so isn't theological. It's because the local priest is often very well acquainted with my neighbours, and tends to have good advice on how to deal with interpersonal issues related to that. I have little respect for their theological delusions, but when it comes to serving the community and generally keeping sensitive matters confidential, I extend all due respect.

@toiletpaper @georgia @shibao We're all genocidal narcissists fighting for our own cause. To each tribe, it's a war of self-defense against XYZ aggression. Let's talk pragmatism then, instead of belief: let's say I side against the Christians, what kind of support can I expect from the pagans in the wars to come, cultural or otherwise? how many thousands of druids and shamans and their tribes, agreeing to stand under a single banner? how many of them will fight for order, uphold civilization, denounce things like polygamy?

I'll get 17 guys who can't agree on anything other than hating Christianity, 3 38 year old wicca spinsters trying to sell me crystals, and the Muslims or Buddhists or Hindis will just steamroll the whole area. I'd much rather side with the guys with whom I share culture and a basic moral framework, this war was decided back in the days of the Teutonic Order, and then once again in the 40s when a pagan-friendly power rose and your nation fought against them.

@toiletpaper @shibao @nerthos youre obnoxious and I'm not even a believer in abrahamic religion

@georgia @shibao @nerthos

> youre obnoxious

Fuck you too. At least I know what I'm talking about and can explain why I think what I do rather than just bleating "book said so".

@toiletpaper @shibao @nerthos sorry to be blunt, its nice you take yourself so seriously because of your citations but youre a neopagan (lol) who has the nerve to call other peoples beliefs "superstition", "delusion", etc etc. and when people say what they actually believe you disagree and say actually youre supposed to believe this!

@nerthos @georgia @shibao

> We're all genocidal narcissists fighting for our own cause. To each tribe, it's a war of self-defense against XYZ aggression.

I can see how you'd have that impression when the only theological concept you've been inculcated with is Abrahamic. But outside that set of superstitions it's not quite as relevant as you think. At least not on the basis of religion.

> how many thousands of druids and shamans and their tribes, agreeing to stand under a single banner?

If you ever attend a Pagan festival you'll see for yourself. When it comes to theological differences the overarching Pagan ethos is "respectful cultural exchange". We may march to different drummers, but we have no problem doing it under a big tent together, nor with coming to each others' defence as needed.

> denounce things like polygamy

As a rule Pagans don't concern themselves with the consensual sexual activity of other people. So on that count, you're unlikely to find too much support.

> this war was decided

It's not a war. It's a garden that's in a continual process of cultivation. You can spread shit over it all you want, but end of the day even if it looks like it's covered up, it only grows stronger as a result.

@georgia @shibao @nerthos

I haven't told anyone else what to believe. At most I've explained why I don't believe, and why belief is more or less irrelevant. As to superstition, I'm hardly the first to say this about Abrahamic beliefs. People like Celsus, Porphyry, Julian, Cicero, and so on have been said the same thousands of years ago, and very accurately predicted the results of ignoring that fact. I'd say if you want to hear what I do believe, you could ask me, but you just burned that bridge. I won't waste breath discussing spiritual matters with you now.

@toiletpaper @shibao @nerthos thats okay I'm pretty set in my spiritual beliefs based on my own personal experiences with the Supreme Lord

@toiletpaper @georgia @shibao
>I can see how you'd have that impression when the only theological concept you've been inculcated with is Abrahamic.

You truly believe this huh? The classic "you disagree because you're ignorant and I'm wise" bullshit, which is why I don't see arguing with you as productive.

>We may march to different drummers, but we have no problem doing it under a big tent together, nor with coming to each others' defence as needed.

You're thousands in a battleground decided by hundreds of millions.

>As a rule Pagans

I can't take you seriously when you say things like that, at most you have a siege truce, you'd kill eachother in weeks if you weren't terrified of extermination by bigger players, like you used to do before the crusader armies pacified you.

>You can spread shit over it all you want, but end of the day even if it looks like it's covered up, it only grows stronger as a result.

Good thing I'm posting my shits here in Shitposter.world, where shits are posted and grow strong and post-like




Religiously I'm not even anti-Pagan, I'm on good terms with the old gods of my blood. I am however against this ridiculous revisionist posturing of "we're the good guys and peaceful and nice and virtuous and have always been until the fire nation attacked" because it's a soviet propaganda tier lie. It is proven by the fact that you hopped into a thread where three non-churchgoers were discussing Christian theology just to insult it, you're the aggressor here.

@nerthos @georgia @shibao

> The classic "you disagree because you're ignorant and I'm wise" bullshit

More like the "show me evidence/examples to the contrary".

What strikes me about the past few comments is that I'm criticising an ideology along with it's historical track record and the evident consequences of perpetuating it. You guys on the other hand are simply deflecting with butthurt and personal insults. That's a rather stark difference in attitude from where I'm standing.

> You're thousands in a battleground decided by hundreds of millions.

I'd rather fight on the side of what I feel is right, regardless of the forces stacked against me. In the words of Odin, "The coward believes he will live forever if he holds back in the battle, but in old age he shall have no peace though spears have spared his limbs."

> discussing Christian theology just to insult it, you're the aggressor here.

Yeah. And the victim is the theology, not you yourselves. A fact worth remembering.

@toiletpaper @georgia @shibao
>"show me evidence/examples to the contrary"

Why? I don't care about changing your mind at all. You're pissed about people being friendly towards Christianity, I'm not pissed about you being a pagan.

>I'm criticising an ideology along with it's historical track record and the evident consequences of perpetuating it.

Completely off topic thread-crashing, so you should be able to see why the reaction you get is negative.

>I'd rather fight on the side of what I feel is right, regardless of the forces stacked against me.

We have agreement on this at least

@nerthos @georgia @shibao

> You're pissed about people being friendly towards Christianity

Again, as I've said at least twice already, I'm pissed about people promoting an ideology which explicitly advocates to murder me and my ilk (with the consistent historical trackrecord to show for it).

I'm friendly towards individual Christians too, but not Christianity as an ideology, for the aforementioned reason.

> Completely off topic thread-crashing

I started off posting about divination, but the conversation took a turn towards theology. I'm not the only one responsible for that. And frankly if you don't want people responding in a public thread, don't fucking post it in public. #socialmedia101

> We have agreement on this at least

Small blessings. Though I'd wager what we respectively consider "right" would still be at crossed purposes.

@toiletpaper @georgia @shibao

>I'm pissed about people promoting an ideology

We weren't promoting anything just discussing it

>what we respectively consider "right" would still be at crossed purposes.

What I consider "right" is simple, the destruction of thieves and traitors and agitators, and those enemies who are set to remain enemies; the defense and propagation of my people. If you carve wooden idols in the woods I have no beef with you, if you raid monasteries for the gold and silver and slaves I do.

@nerthos @georgia @shibao

> We weren't promoting anything just discussing it

As was I. You got indignant when I said the messiah was taken out of it's original context (which is true), and started blathering on about me viewing Yahweh as my enemy, and projecting about me being close minded. I'm not. I just need something more substantial than your personal opinion or "because BuyBull said" in order to take it seriously. As I said in my reply, I don't give a rats ass about some Jewish fairy tale megalomaniac, any more than I care about a Marvel comic book super villain. If you don't like it, tough shit. The butthurt is all yours.

@toiletpaper @georgia @shibao I still have no idea what "buybull" is supposed to be

@nerthos @toiletpaper @georgia @shibao it's a bull market so buy buy buy

@hakui @shibao @georgia @toiletpaper

@toiletpaper @nerthos @georgia @shibao touch pee pees and kiss or whatever

@Ree @toiletpaper @georgia @shibao No you do whatever you want with your pee pee but mine is only for my girl