File: 1769543285892397.png (1.24 MB, 793x1725)

1.24 MB PNG

>>42196601
Previous thread >>42074476

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_NkZqqlzcM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tq_9ejRzFfQ

https://annas-archive.gl/md5/cd048f5e379b5bc1854049f9d765e7cb

What've you fellas been reading lately and what've you gotten out of it

File: Origen hashtaglegend.jpg (2.16 MB, 1452x1723)

2.16 MB JPG

Anyone else here the ascribes to the mystic mythicist view of the Bible?

Basically just an extreme version of Origen and Gregroy of Nyssa's allegorical readings of the Bible.

I don't believe that anything at all in the Bible literally physically/materially happened, including the entire Jesus.

However, I do believe that that are valuable spiritual truths that can be gleaned from the stories within.

As you can problably imagine, this viewpoint doesn't exactly allow me to be on friendly terms with most modern day Christians.

>>42197817

*that ascribes to

*including the entire Jesus story

*that there are

sorry for my stupid typos

File: 1774068418844246.jpg (583 KB, 1052x1402)

583 KB JPG

>>42197817
I lean this way, but I only occasionally glance at these threads because my impression is that the OP wants them to be for orthodox Christians

>>42197817
>I don't believe that anything at all in the Bible literally physically/materially happened, including the entire Jesus.
The Jesus events being historically viable are what makes Christianity literally true and separates it from other religions.

>>42197688
I've been rereading Angelomorphic Pneumatology, trying to square ancient Christian traditions with Christian Cabala and later theosophy
>>42197817
David, John the Baptist, Jesus, James, etc... are real historical figures, for example Josephus speaks of them, how do you explain that eith your mythicist view?
Adam and Eve aren't historical, you could say they're meta-historical or whatever, the fall of Adam explains how humans fell from eternity into time, from eternal spirits like the angels to beings that have a beginning and end with our birth and death
And most stories are double, for example Israel and his sons come down to Egypt both literally, and the Angel Israel (the Prayer of Joseph makes Israel the Son of God) comes down with the the angels to the material world, Adam and Eve are Jesus and the Church, Cain, Abel and Seth then would be their offspring, we have a lot of exegesis like this, from Philo to Origen (where the Israel one is from) to Böhme
>>42198141
Yes without the literal victory over death, our faith is nothing

>Prompt for AI:
There's a book by Jeremy Royal Howard titled "Christianity and Quantum Physics". It's about the use of the Copenhagen Interpretation and it's relation to Christian apologetics. What do you know about it? It feels like a culture-war-coded pushback against some of the excesses of the Fundamental Fysiks Group and their co-travelers...and I'm here for it. Are there other critiques of the FFG, similar that Subliminal Jihad episode? Preferably in book form? Doesn't Philip Ball's book "Beyond Weird" contain a criticism of the Copenhagen Interpretation?

File: Gregory.jpg (125 KB, 642x1000)

125 KB JPG

>>42198141
And this is why I don't align with any modern Christians. Because I completely disagree with you on that point.

It doesn't need to have literally happened for me to find value in it.

Look into the primary sources for any religion or any ancient history and you'll see it all completely falls apart.

This is why an allegorical interpretation like that portrayed in Gregory of Nysaa's writings, combined with mystical approaches (direct experiential knowledge of god/the divine, rather than "blind faith"), is the only honest way to approach Christianity.

Have you read Gregory of Nyssa or practiced any of the experiential techniques of the mystics?

>>42198165
>Josephus

Have you examined the provenance for Josephus's writings that mention these figures?

For example, have you looked at the chain of ownership and historical record regarding the manuscripts of his writings?

Once you do this, you'll see that they're clearly not reliable.

In most cases, the primary sources were "lost", "burnt", or "discovered" in the 1800s.

>>42198200
>It doesn't need to have literally happened for me to find value in it.
For your value to be real and not just in your head it does
>Look into the primary sources for any religion or any ancient history and you'll see it all completely falls apart.
How so for Christianity?

>>42198216
For Josephus specifically, we've got multiple manuscripts from the 11th century onward in different languages, latin, greek, slavonic
>>42198222
Yes that's how Christianity is superior to most other religions, belief in Christianity can be justified with the resurrection, whereas for example Islam, what's the reason to believe in it?
The resurrection is a miracle, whereas the Quran? It's a book, I don't see what makes it miraculous, I don't know how muslims even justify it, genuinely i mean, because i do know their tricks and lies, how it's perfect and the most beautiful work and how it's perfectly preserved right down to the letter

File: Sinaiticus.png (560 KB, 1980x772)

560 KB PNG

>>42198222
>How so for Christianity?
Identify the texts that are claimed to be historical sources for the events that happened in the bible (or any history from a similar time period).

Find out what the original manuscripts of these texts are meant to be.

Find where they are now held (if they even still exist)

Find out what the official provenance is for the manuscripts

Judge for yourself if the information you have found is reasonable

For example, do you think that this discovery story regarding the Codex Sinaiticus is reliable?

"He wrote that in 1844, during his first visit to the Saint Catherine's Monastery, he saw some leaves of parchment in a waste-basket. They were "rubbish which was to be destroyed by burning it in the ovens of the monastery", although this is firmly denied by the Monastery. After examination he realized that they were part of the Septuagint, written in an early Greek uncial script. He retrieved from the basket 129 leaves in Greek which he identified as coming from a manuscript of the Septuagint."

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

>>42198258
>For example, do you think that this discovery story regarding the Codex Sinaiticus is reliable?
It doesn't need to be, in order to be historically valuable. The Septuagint also has miracle stories attributed to it that aren't necessary in order to use it in a case supporting Christianity.

>>42198252
So the official story is that you have manuscripts dating from roughly 1,000 years after the events supposedly took place?

If this is the case, just be honest with yourself. That obviously isn't proof that these events took place

>>42198270
When you have dozens of manuscripts in different languages from different time periods and different places, all telling the same story, the same story mentioned by other manuscripts are within a certain text, then it probably is proof it happened
I know you want to play skeptic, but like that you can deny everything

File: Rolle.jpg (78 KB, 505x800)

78 KB JPG

>>42198303
I do deny all history.

I understand that I hold a relatively unsual stance on these sorts of things.

The only point I'm trying to make with all this is that it's still possible, at least in my opinion, to be a Christian while not believing that any of these events literally happened.

Allegorical readings, and direct experiential knowledge of the divine are why I believe.

For others, they may prefer something else. But for anyone else like me who is highly skeptical, you may find my style useful.

This is also a good stance to hold against atheists or anti-christians who will rightfully point out the flaws in the historical record regarding the Bible.

Researching occult and esoteric stuff (books and online) brought me full circle back to just trusting and having faith in Jesus
I don’t want to devote much more time to anything else. It’s funny, all the Reddit atheist fags I knew growing up have seemingly gotten into gnostic chaos magick luciferian bollocks, all of them critical of Christianity but never of Judaism or Islam

>>42198330
Your perspective renders (reduces) all points of view equally viable. There is no reason to believe your experiences over my own or over a random schizos
It is tranny ideology, evil.

>>42198330
>who will rightfully point out the flaws in the historical record regarding the Bible.
To say there are flaws implies there are parts that are true
You selectively cherry pick the deconstructive parts to build your worldview on. There is nothing wrong with saying either "I don't know what that part means" or "there's reason to believe that part isn't true" like the early Christians did with Mark 16. But dispensing with the whole biblical narrative over it is throwing the baby out with the bath water

File: Baron Roman Ungern von St(...).jpg (316 KB, 800x500)

316 KB JPG

>>42196601
Thread theme: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jl40sYGDAlk
>I know that only the restoration of kings will save humanity corrupted by the West.

>>42198338
>There is no reason to believe your experiences over my own or over a random schizos

I agree, you shouldn't believe my experiences. You should believe your own, using your own reason.

If your experiences have led you to disagree with the points that I have raised, then you should believe that.

Why do you believe in the literal historical story of some parts of the Bible?

Have you ever looked into the primary sources?

File: Screenshot_20260403-133733(1).png (445 KB, 1440x2380)

445 KB PNG

>>42198409
Yes I find certain important texts like Mark, Luke, acts, and 1 Corinthians to be imminently historically viable documents, and the secular consensus seems to agree. They just aren't Christian because they don't see miraculous events as viable on principle, but it sure seems like miraculous events are the best explanation there is to explain Christianitys origin, the conversion of Paul, and the religions wide spread amidst persecution

If you have something to substantial to share, please do so and stop teasing

>>42198407
Baste. Can anyone recommend a good entry-level monarchist book? I've tried to watch two podcast interviews with Charles Coulombe on the topic, but find him insufferable, which makes me not hopeful about his book. Also, is Bloody White Baron worth reading?

>>42198421
So you believe they are historically viable because an AI overview told you that scholrs believe it was written around 55 AD?

Or have you actually looked into this yourself?

>>42198347
>There is nothing wrong with saying either "I don't know what that part means" or "there's reason to believe that part isn't true"

I do know what the stories mean

and

There's reason to believe that none of the Bible happened. Of course, I don't know with 100% certainty, but I think it's much more likely than not that none of the events took place.

>>42198550
You're being condescending. If you have anything substantial to share, please do so.

>>42198575
>There's reason to believe that none of the Bible happened.
What reason is that particularly for the events of Jesus
Preferably a direct answer that shares information with me as opposed to asking me "have you looked it up?!"

>>42198586
I started a discussion about allegorical readings of the Bible, and Christian mysticism.

My intention was for people to pick up on any of those topics.

Gregory of Nyssa, Origen, Rolle, St Julian, St Teresa, St John of the Cross, The Cloud of Unknowing.

These are the sorts of things that make me believe.

I would like to hear what other people think about this.

Please, anyone jump in with your direct experiential knowledge of the divine and/or your allegorical readings of biblical events.

File: Screenshot_2026-04-03_161135.jpg (429 KB, 720x1604)

429 KB JPG

Fuck you bitches I'm going to kill every single one of you with the word of God and you shall die and you will know your sin

>>42198617
Yes there's a mystic science across all religions that one can tap into, but only the Jesus event is where spiritual mysticism crossed into a historical reality that can actually be examined as viable
Otherwise there's no metric with which to discern the mystic experiences of Christianity against those of Hinduism or satanism or schizos on the street. If you don't care to know that your truth has actual value as real truth then there is no point in having any sort of discussion

>>42198597
Because we don't have any verifiable primary sources from the time.

Which specific source convinced you of the historicity of Jesus? I'll look into it with an open mind.

Or, genuinely asking, why do you believe in the historicity of the Jesus story?

>>42198650
Why don't you see any of the documents I mentioned as historically viable? Virtually the entire new testament, with minor possible exceptions like 3 John or 2 Peter, were likely written within the lifespan of believers immediately following Jesus. This is the historical consensus, not Christian revisionism.

>>42198660
I already posted the dubious story regarding the discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus, one of the most important early surviving new testament manuscripts. (found in 1844)

The Codex Vaticanus is another important early surviving manuscript, that can, at best, be traced back to 1481.

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

Obviously, I'm not going to believe either of these sources that purport to provide evidence for events that took place many hundreds of years before their traceable provenance can go back to.

Which specific manuscripts/sources for Mark, Luke, Acts or 1 Corinthians convinced you of their reliability?

>>42198704
>Using the study of comparative writing styles (palaeography), it has been dated to the 4th century AD.
From the opening paragraph of your link

>>42198704
>I already posted the dubious story regarding the discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus, one of the most important early surviving new testament manuscripts. (found in 1844)
If I found some documents in a cave that dated back to the second century, and then came up with a nonsense story about how they were given to me by angels, that does not render the documents historically useless

>>42198617
None of those authors are historically reliable, all their manuscripts were discovered in the 1800s, we can't take them seriously

>>42198704
Also we have richer manuscript evidence for the NT than any other texts of antiquity. It's very easily verifiable but here is one for Mark
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_137
Keep in mind we have hundreds/thousands of these depending on the book, plus quotations from church fathers

>>42198725
I agree, as historical figures they are not reliable.

However, we can agree with the writings that are ascribed to these characters, whether they literally existed or not.

>>42198732
>Also we have richer manuscript evidence for the NT than any other texts of antiquity. It's very easily verifiable but here is one for Mark
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_137
This comes from the infamous Oxyrhynchus Papyri.

"The Oxyrhynchus Papyri are a group of manuscripts discovered during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries by papyrologists Bernard Pyne Grenfell and Arthur Surridge Hunt at an ancient rubbish dump near Oxyrhynchus in Egypt"

Found in a rubbish dump in the 1890s.

>>42198755
So what? Why does that affect their dating or historical value

>>42198768
Because if they were only found in the 1890s, we can never know for sure when they were actually originally made.

For all we know, they could have been made in the 1890s. Essentially, they could be complete fakes.

They could also be genuine.

Neither of us know for sure.

I believe leaning more towards not reliable is much more reasonable given the circumstances

>>42198748
No we can't, if we don't ever know their author what can we say about them?
And they conflict with my personal experience

>>42198789
>we can never know for sure when they were actually originally made.
No but we can make informed guesses through analysis
https://ehrmanblog.org/what-the-new-fragment-of-marks-gospel-looks-like-the-so-called-first-century-mark/
This is a blog by Bart Ehrman, an agnostic professor of religious studies speaking on the papyri and validating the competency of the experts involved in dating it. Unfortunately his link to the analysis 404s, I can try to find something else if you aren't able, but hopefully his unbiased expert opinion counts for something.

>>42196601
Videos on Gnosis, its various types (SPG, UPG & VPG) and Gnosticism:

https://youtu.be/0F7knBtLsNs
https://youtu.be/260L-DEZVQ0
https://youtu.be/diHf_Tup6tE

What has happened to x? This is the only good thread I've seen so far while scrolling.

File: Jesus is beautiful!.jpg (48 KB, 375x500)

48 KB JPG

Jesus died for our sins but will rise again on the third day to fulfill the prophecy he will descend into hell to free a few souls and then reunite with his disciples

>>42196601
15 hours 40 minutes to the resurrection timeframe (~2hours). Then 7 years and 11 days

File: the black hundreds.jpg (98 KB, 978x550)

98 KB JPG

>>42198427
Manual of the Monarchist – Black Hundreds (Rukovodstvo monarkhista-chernosotentsa, 1906) by Vladimir Gringmut
Reflections of a Russian Statesman by Konstantin Pobedonostsev
On Monarchist Statehood by Lev Tikhomirov (former revolutionary who later ideolgically converted to extreme monarchism).
Die Konservative Revolution in Deutschland 1918–1932: Ein Handbuch by Armin Mohler
Die Herrschaft der Minderwertigen by Edgar Julius Jung
The Decline of the West and Prussianism and Socialism by Oswald Spengler (he praised prussian authoritarian values and "caesarism" and was influental on monarchists
Considerations on France by Joseph de Maistre (blistering attack on the French Revolution as divine punishment and a call for restored monarchy and papal authority as the only path to order.)
Théorie du pouvoir politique et religieux dans la société civile (Theory of Political and Religious Power, 1796, 3 vols.) by Louis de Bonald

>>42201814
So awesome. Thank you!

>>42201814
De Maistre was also a Martinist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NH_rjA2AuGg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlDXdPSEtgk

File: rose_among_the_laurel.jpg (938 KB, 1080x2955)

938 KB JPG

https://holystonesandironbones.com/2025/01/05/the-rose-among-the-laurel-rosaries-and-catholicism-in-appalachian-folk-traditions/

>>42202204
Ah yes the traditional islamic values of child marriage, homosexuality, cousin marriage, polyamory, dressing their women in hijabs causing vitamin d defficiency, and waging jihad against the infidels

>>42202204
This ridiculous big tent coalition thinking is a result of the americanist mind disease.
It’s a democratic habit of mind, even when dressed in anti-democratic clothing: everyone at the table as equals, bargaining, compromising, forever adjusting the tent poles to fit whoever shows up.
Sometimes people forget that some alliances profane the cause itself.

>>42202204
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/l9P4b77ZV2k
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/jHJdK2Rfa4E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrBgSzjSvZE

>>42196601
https://x.com/tsidpod/status/2028856609313575127?s=20