Nietzsche Failed To Understand Christianity

[@ThoughtsonThinking]

Develop your skills. Free 1-1 coaching call: antiprocrastination.carrd.co/

[@tomrhodes1629]

Speaking of coaching...Nietzsche was WRONG on most important points...but he wasn't wrong about the Pauline corruption of Christianity. I'm tired of making big long comments, so give me a "click" if you want to know more, and the door of your mind isn't closed to Truth. "Unless ye become as little children..." Elijah has returned, as prophesied, and testifies.

[@filipradic7834]

I think that in Orthodoxy there is a huge emphasis on inner freedom (true freedom), while the West has gone in the direction of external freedoms.

[@Hank-e2d]

Submit to Rome

[@edwartvonfectonia4362]

I think, although Orthodoxy is not as dogmatic as Catholicism, it was and still used for gaining power and building nations. People from East Europe would understand. But yes, it's not necessary to be in the cast to follow Jesus's scriptures. Thanks for the video!

[@ManNamedBrUce]

While you made a good observation, that a lot of Nietzsche’s critique was of contemporaneous religious institutions, practices, and beliefs (dogmatism) as opposed to actual Christianity or Jesus, I do not agree that Nietzsche did NOT understand Christianity. Please let’s not pretend he didn’t understand Christianity-read any biography to see his credentials. You made no mention of his “psychological” insights or interpretations of Christianity which, to me, are some of the most profound and damning examples.

[@ManNamedBrUce]

A better (more accurate) title would be: We Never Fully Understood Nietzsche on Christianity or How the teachings of Nietzsche don’t fully tell his view of Christianity 😅

[@Inanis354]

Please share some of his psychological insights. (Such as his writings) I would like to read them

[@disposablehero1235]

he was German so his theology was probably protestant theology. therefor he misinterpret christianity

[@supasf]

​@disposablehero1235 this. Protestantism is goofy, orthodoxy is the only authentic form of Christianity

[@johnobryan2293]

By the way this was in my recommended feed. I listened to you and you have a new subscriber.

[@ratiofides7713]

I am an agnostic so feel free to take everything I'm about to say with a giant grain of salt, but I was (and still am) very interested in Christianity and its history so I'd like to offer some criticism. I'd like to start with the points I agree with. I do think Nietzsche might've misunderstood Christianity fundamentally as well as confused it with its misuses and perversions. One should judge Christianity from the example of those who lived up to its ideals (which only Christ fully did) and not from those who clearly failed. With that said, it is important to criticize the misuses and perversions as well. You are right to point out that Christianity is hardly related to slave morality; one shouldn't mistake kindness for weakness. Christian morality has throughout history been expressed through the ideals of chivalry, through the image of the perfect knight, which was itself inspired by the example of Christ being both a lamb and a lion - not half lamb, half lion, but in a sense fully encompassing both the lamb and the lion archetype. As C.S.Lewis put it: “The knight is a man of blood and iron, a man familiar with the sight of smashed faces and the ragged stumps of lopped-off limbs; he is also a demure, almost a maidenlike, guest in hall, a gentle, modest, unobtrusive man. He is not a compromise or happy mean between ferocity and meekness; he is fierce to the nth and meek to the nth.” Now, onto the criticism. Firstly, I'd suggest being careful with phrases like "true Christianity" without having some firm historical and theological backing. Anyone can claim to follow the "true Christianity", but if that version of Christianity isn't supported by what we know from history, especially the history of the early Church, then one should question what makes them so confident that their interpretation is true and everyone else got it entirely wrong for hundreds or even thousands of years. Same as with any book, the Bible can be interpreted in nearly infinite number of ways, it doesn't interpret itself, which becomes obvious once one considers the number of disagreeing denominations who all apparently follow Scripture alone. "Why would you accept the denomination of Christianity from the Roman Empire which crucified Jesus?" This sentence seems to indicate a lack of historical, but also theological understanding. First of all, the church of Rome had very little to do with the Roman Empire, sharing only the name and the location. It was the church "founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul", the church with which "all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world", as Irenaeus put it, writing in the 2nd century. You also say that the Catholic Church was used to gain power by Constantine when he himself in fact leaned towards Arianism later in his reign, and his son and successor was openly Arian, therefore opposed to the Catholic Church. The Roman church was often persecuted, but in the end it prevailed. It shouldn't be surprising that Christians accepted the Church originating from the same city as that of its oppressors; they did the same with the cross, they took a symbol of torture and despair and transformed it into a symbol of healing and hope. It is interesting that you find the Catholic Church to be the perfect example of Christianity done wrong, but then you find the Orthodox Church to be an example of Christianity done right. The two Churches were one Church for the first thousand years of Christian history, they agree on pretty much everything and they came close to uniting back multiple times. The biggest difference is that of the authority the Pope should possess, and even then the Orthodox Church does recognize the primacy of the Pope; they just disagree on exactly how much authority he should have. Which also brings me to your view of the idea of the Papacy being "nonsense". You state it as one of the reasons you like Orthodoxy, but as I said even the Orthodox Church recognizes the primacy of the Pope. It also has the same "man made rituals", priests and bishops, which you claimed were not a part of Christianity but only Catholicism. It also has most of the same "additions" you seem to dislike. I'm not saying Catholicism is true, that it's without problems or anything like that, as I said I'm agnostic, but I do think you might lack the historical knowledge to understand these things on a deeper level at the moment.

[@ThoughtsonThinking]

Absolutely I am still learning. I believe my main issues against the catholics is that the priests cannot marry nor have children which the Orthodox Church don’t commit to that belief.

[@ratiofides7713]

@@ThoughtsonThinking Sure, that's true, but keep in mind that it is a disciplinary rule, and as such can change or have exceptions. There are married Catholic priests, primarily Eastern Rite Catholic priests, but there are Western Rite ones as well, mostly converts from Anglicanism and Lutheranism. At the same time, there are restrictions to marriage in Orthodox Church as well; you may marry and then become a priest, but you cannot become a priest and then marry. You also generally cannot become a bishop if you're a married priest. Also keep in mind there are both historical and scriptural reasons for this rule. If I'm not mistaken, the rule was reinforced in the west to fight against simony, the act of selling church offices; in a time where having children and continuing your line was politically important, this was a significant discouragement to those who wanted roles in the Church for political reasons. And perhaps it worked, in comparison to the Orthodox Church at least, which is usually very closely tied to the state and its politics. That's also one of the reasons why it could be hard to view the Orthodox Church as one singular Church, it is more like a collection of Churches which have a hard time working together. Don't know if you're aware, but the Russian Orthodox Church is currently in schism with several other Orthodox Churches, and it's all happening because of the politics behind the Ukraine-Russia conflicts. There are also theological and scriptural reasons to prefer celibacy. The priest is meant to imitate Christ, act "in persona Christi", and as Jesus was not married it seemed fitting for priests to be unmarried as well. There are also passages in the bible reinforcing the value of celibacy: "For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others-and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven." - Matthew 19:12 "Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do." - 1 Corinthians 7:8 There's probably more but you get the point. In my time learning about Catholicism, I didn't find much, if anything really, that the Church teaches which doesn't have at least some basis in the Bible, the early history ("The Church Fathers"), or both. A lot of it will depend on whether you agree with a given interpretation of some Bible passage or another, but at least there is some support for all of their claims.

[@ericvulgate]

They literally call themselves sheep. A Shepard doesn't keep watch over a flock to be nice to them. Best case scenario they only want your wool.

[@ThoughtsonThinking]

@@ericvulgate want the best of what you produce unto the world.

[@tomrhodes1629]

You'd love my video "Why Agnostics Are Wise." Nietzsche was WRONG on most important points...but he wasn't wrong about the Pauline corruption of Christianity. I'm tired of making big long comments, so give me a "click" if you want to know more, and the door of your mind isn't closed to Truth. "Unless ye become as little children..." Elijah has returned, as prophesied, and testifies.

[@engineeredtruths8935]

Awesome to see the path you are taking. It reminds me of Fr. Seraphim Rose who was walking a similar path to yours. If you hadn't heard of him yet I recommend you checking out his books and also most importantly his statement regarding how he came to the faith. He goes over it in one of his more famous books, Orthodoxy and the religion of the future.

[@ThoughtsonThinking]

Will be studying his path soon my friend. I read him partially a few years ago on his critique of Nihilism but will be embracing his work much more going forward 🙏☦️

[@engineeredtruths8935]

@@ThoughtsonThinking may Christ enlighten your path brother

[@kimfreeborn]

I would say that Nietzsche is critiquing Christian Morality. This quite clear in his critique of Christianity as a life denying and other worldly religion that promises immortality to its believers. To Nietzsche this is nihilism once the edifice of God is removed. Judaism is more in line with Nietzsche it has no promise of immortality. Ecclesiastes 3:19 For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same. As one dies so dies the other; indeed, they all have the same breath and there is no advantage for man over beast, for all is vanity. All go to the same place. All came from the dust and all return to the dust. Who knows that the breath of man ascends upward and the breath of the beast descends downward to the earth? I have seen that nothing is better than that man should be happy in his activities, for that is his lot. For who will bring him to see what will occur after him?

[@dansal3799]

The Roman Empire was the center of the world at that time. The fact that Christianity centered itself in Rome meant that it centered the world around itself. That’s why one would accept the faith that originates in Rome.

[@herambaanjaneya2177]

Wouldn't simply enjoying Divinity and the Divine via let's say Reform Judaism be a lot, lot simpler than Jesus worship which I have always considered blasphemy!? Liberal Judaism doesn't possess all the problems that Christianity has!

[@supasf]

That's taking a pragmatic approach to religion which is just silly. It's about the truth, not what seems to be more convenient to you. God has revealed himself to be a Trinity, therefore it's the truth. Simple as. In fact, the Holy Trinity is found in many places of the Old Testament and dozens upon dozens of prophecies of the upcoming Messiah are perfectly fulfilled by Jesus Christ.

[@johnobryan2293]

Nietzsche also said "True Christianity is still possible without the dogma". From, The Will to Power.

[@bryansmith6054]

Christianity needs to be simple so everyone gets it. Listen to the Holy Spirit.

[@PearTree450]

The main problem with Christianity is that everyone thinks they do.

[@bryansmith6054]

Psalms 46:10 Be still and know that I am god.

[@bryansmith6054]

Cry out to God from your heart and he will hear you.

[@bryansmith6054]

I’ve been on this earth for a while and I’ve seen how amazing God has been in my life I can go on and on and on about different things that happened in my life and he is truly real and genuine there is power in the name of Jesus.

[@bryansmith6054]

Bible…Basic instructions before leaving earth.

[@NealWhitmania]

Thanks for the take, Spencer. I agree entirely with your take on true Christianity being discipleship and that Nietzsche failed utterly to critique the Christianity that is presented in Christian scriptures. I'm not as convinced as you seem to be that Orthodox Christianity has remained free of dogma as a whole, being experienced in Orthodox Christianity as it has become inculcated in cultures, but I would agree that it has not since Symeon's Reforms been as constrained by worldly ideology as the western tradition was. Certainly there are few Orthodox Saints I have read who have failed to express the core ideologies of biblical Christianity in the exertions towards holiness. Good stuff. I think that Protestantism has been hurt by denominationalism, but the reformation has also brought out a lot of true Christianity in spite of the western idealism that has so often perverted it. Its never as one-sided as we think when we look closely, because, as you acknowledge, Jesus is truth and he may actually be found by anyone who genuinely seeks Him, regardless of tradition. (Also I would suggest that Jesus is not precisely beyond good and evil. He is what good is. Evil is what he is not. Its a bit of a different cast on the matter than you seem to have understood.)

[@henrypaul8823]

Nothing can go beyond good and evil but we can look beyond our preconceptions of what we believe is good and evil.

[@JMBBrasil]

Jesus is not beyond good and evil. He is Good. Evil is what he is not. Love the video. Keep going! Beijos from Brazil !

[@lukejones7164]

Modern Western Civilization as a whole failed to understand Christianity

[@timforester4212]

blessings to you! keep pursuing the truth. I recommend attending a ROCOR liturgy

[@asdfasdf-dg2qx]

No he understood Christianity, it's that you don't. Which is why you adhere to it.

[@ThoughtsonThinking]

Terrible rebuttal. Makes no logical sense lol

[@supasf]

Of course, an anon yt commenter knows more about it than the past 2000 years of theologians who have studied and explicated the faith, and yet remained Christians, some of whom Saints. Makes sense

[@JMBBrasil]

Very good. I’m subscribing.

[@svenz.1391]

"The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, speaks of slaves and masters. And intends to be the master." Ayn Rand

[@tomrhodes1629]

A true quote - from a very demented, selfish woman. Nietzsche was WRONG on most important points...but he wasn't wrong about the Pauline corruption of Christianity. I'm tired of making big long comments, so give me a "click" if you want to know more, and the door of your mind isn't closed to Truth. "Unless ye become as little children..." Elijah has returned, as prophesied, and testifies.

[@JackpotTripleSeven]

“Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.” ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭53‬:‭4‬-‭5‬, ‭7‬ ‭KJV‬‬

[@madguruJ]

Totally agree about Orthodoxy, vs the corrupt Catholicism and Protestantism, check out Father Spyridon

[@pasal99]

They are the same mf .

[@disposablehero1235]

eastern "orthodoxy"

[@supasf]

​@disposablehero1235 the one holy Catholic apostolic Eastern Orthodox church ☦️

[@Jimmylad.]

11:20 I’m not sure what you mean by this I’m getting heavy into orthodoxy too but it has its fair share of dogma and councils which is a good thing there’s nothing wrong with dogma it’s an integral part of the church Orthodoxy subscribes to the seven ecumenical councils as dogma Also you have St Gregory of Palamas essence energy distinction which is dogma

[@ThoughtsonThinking]

Im still uncovering orthodoxy and have got many years to do so but if anything my heart will probably reside outside all denominations. None of them are necessary to be a Christian and maybe something to be created outside of these separatist denominations is what is needed for the future.

[@ThoughtsonThinking]

When I said worthy I meant in the sense that it is the least tampered with. It also sticks with the KJB and doesn't create multiple different translations. Not a fan of the protestant movement for example because its not traditional and is all over the place with regards to its forms of worship, the charismatic movement with televangelists and its attempts to bring in mainstream ideas to bring in more people is not via the narrow gate you could say.

[@Jimmylad.]

@@ThoughtsonThinking I share some sympathies with your sentiment however according to Orthodoxy you cannot remain outside the church and be a Christian The Catholics believe this also The holy spirit is not present with the sacraments unless you are in the church this concerns apostolic succession. A good example to illustrate this is that Catholics (and I’m sure orthodox people would agree) consider the Holy Spirit absent in Anglicanism because their ordination is invalid as it adopted many Calvinist teachings in the 16th century. For more on this see Apostolicae curae a papal bull, issued in 1896 by Pope Leo XIII, regarding Anglican ordination. Interestingly the Catholics still regard Orthodox as valid because it still has apostolic succession even though they regard it as a schismatic church. Again apostolic succession concerns the priests ordination. So unless you are in the Orthodox Church this apostolic succession will remain absent. Again why is this important? Because Rene Guénon outlined how you need to initiate yourself into an authentic Tradition. The only authentic Traditions in Christianity is either Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. Without apostolic succession your initiation is worthless, in fact there is no initiation. Baptism is a scared initiation.

[@ThoughtsonThinking]

@@Jimmylad. Does the Word of God say anything about apostolic succession?

[@Jimmylad.]

@@ThoughtsonThinking Acts 1:15-26 Among a plethora of others This is a core tenant of Eastern Orthodoxy If you don’t accept apostolic succession you can’t be Orthodox.

[@ericvulgate]

You don't need a deep understanding of a thing to know whether it's false. Not that I agree with this premise. He understood heard mentality, and that is the primary effect of religion, whatever it's origin.

[@ThoughtsonThinking]

To describe a people of a religion as a “herd” is condescending to the sentiment and shows from your standpoint that you are either a nihilist or don’t have the capacity to empathise with what the meaning of a religion is intending to accomplish with its ambitions. Don’t be so sore towards religions especially if that religion actually has intolerance who will act out in support for their faith because that proves otherwise to your claim of mindless “sheep” followers or “herd”.

[@mingus444_gaming]

​@@ThoughtsonThinking Don't understand your last sentence, anyone who acts out in support of their faith IS acting under herd mentality, simple as

[@tomrhodes1629]

Truth is found ONLY on an individual basis. (Original Christianity was gnostic, gnosis meaning knowledge gained through personal reasoning and experience.) Nietzsche was WRONG on most important points...but he wasn't wrong about the Pauline corruption of Christianity. I'm tired of making big long comments, so give me a "click" if you want to know more, and the door of your mind isn't closed to Truth. "Unless ye become as little children..." Elijah has returned, as prophesied, and testifies.

[@flyingscotsman6835]

I think that not having a deep understanding is kind of Not a good way to go when you want to define something as false, search up the dunning Kruger effect

[@JackpotTripleSeven]

Anything that you can’t manifest you can call it “False”

[@Chadthefatherbear]

5:40 because it wasn’t “the Romans” who crucified Jesus 👃 😉

[@BudVidz0]

Lol what?

[@jakemitchell5015]

nobody crucifued him as he didn't exist.

[@BudVidz0]

@@rxvyy oh so he’s just anti-Semitic. Yeah the Jews played a role and so did the Romans, who beat, tortured, and insulted Him.

[@BudVidz0]

@@jakemitchell5015 History check

[@Chadthefatherbear]

@@BudVidz0 awww, you called me “anti-Semitic” 🥺 The highest doctrine in Judaism (the Talmud) states that Jesus is cursed to boil in excrement in Hell 🤣 Just like the Talmud says, “To communicate anything to a non-Jew about our religious relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if the non-Jews knew what we teach about them, they would kill us openly” - Libbre David 37 Just like it says, “If a Jew be called upon to explain any part of the rabbinic books, he ought to give only a false explanation.” - Libbre David So, I’m “anti-Semitic” for understanding and spreading the message of Judaism’s teachings 🤣 Oh nooo 😱

[@Nonprophetelias]

To reply to your initial point about the truths of Christianity and the teachings of Jesus Christ, I would ask you ‘where do you get these teachings from?’ Many of these “additions” that you bring up are part of the church that Christ established at Pentecost. Perhaps I am misrepresenting you, but I am partial to the eastern orthodox position. Eastern orthodox also venerate Mary, have a priesthood, the episcopacy, and church tradition alongside scripture. Also, christ is not beyond good and evil, like some universal platonic good. Christ is good. God is good. Christ is God. I am glad that you are moving away from the occult and into Christian thought and hopefully into the church. The idea that one can just come across the right interpretation without a body of authority to help them interpret thousands of years of theology, leads to the endless schism present in the protestant and neo protestant churches. I respect the fact that you are going after Nas‘s take on Christianity, but a lot of the things he had issues with are core aspects to Christianity. Submission to authority is a main one, and his present in the eastern north Orthodox Church..

[@nuetrino]

Thanks for uploading this. As someone who's walked a similar path and have come to some similar conclusions. I would like to share some struggles. I'm not stating what differences I have, therefore I'm also not saying this applies to anyone. Just my 2 sats. It kinda feels bad when somebody says your views on Jesus are wrong. Especially when your (most likely) more educated on "early church history". My Ego has a desire to go "shitpost mode" and crudely explain to them they are wrong and I am right. These conversations tend be over almost immediately and I realize that I'm a bit of an asshole. No amount of "informed righteousness" seems to make people think my asshole smells nice. I'm trying to find that happy in-between where I feel like I'm standing up for what I believe in without forcing my views on others the way some others do. A different perspective forms a sword that cuts both ways I guess. I'm looking forward to more stories of you Journey. May that which resides in you bring you blessings.

[@giannoutakis]

Orthodoxy is the divergent branch of Christinaity in the Eastern Roman Empire. The people of that part of the empire identified themselves as Romans, the "Byzantine" was a propaganda and derogatory term invented by the Germans of the so called "Holy Roman Empire" in order to legitimize their authority. There are fundamental differences between Catholicism and Orthodoxy but there was a unified Christianity until the official schism of 1054. In the early days, Christianity was basically the social justice movement in the Roman Empire until it became the dominant ideology, incorporating and obliterating at the same time all the old pagan traditions. The "holy" texts we inherited today are the result of endless revisions and rewrittings which were guided by political interests. For example, the "logos" of the Christian god should have been a subsequent invention, I doubt if Christ ever used this word (he didn't even speak any Greek!). It was an invention or a conceptual technology of the Christian emperors to consolidate their power.

[@supasf]

Largely correct until the "social justice" part. Comment fell off hard at that point. Same with muh corruption, which is an unsustainable claim. Lastly, the assertion about Christ and the Greek language is silly. It was the lingua franca of the time, he more than likely spoke it. Much like today most swedes speak good English despite it not being their native language. Most countries in the world actually teach English at school, in fact. But anyway, even if we assume he couldn't speak Greek, how does that invalidate the Gospels? His disciples would've chosen to have their accounts written in Greek so that they're more accessible. Very low tier arguments here

[@user-lh5li8ll7i]

This video demonstrates what you fail to understand about Christianity. Catholicism isnt a denominations its the Church, its all there was until Martin Luther invented the doctrines that caused the denominations which are illegitimate. Even the Othordox Church teaches almost the same as Catholicism and they both came from the Apostles, they schismed over polo

[@csmoviles]

Thank you ❤❤❤for your work

[@ehsanghazavi470]

Christian apologetics at its "best"

[@Jonathan-jk7of]

lol true

[@tomrhodes1629]

Nietzsche was WRONG on most important points...but he wasn't wrong about the Pauline corruption of Christianity. I'm tired of making big long comments, so give me a "click" if you want to know more, and the door of your mind isn't closed to Truth. "Unless ye become as little children..." Elijah has returned, as prophesied, and testifies.

[@crasnicul3371]

he was, Paul contradicted nothing.

[@lifeenjoyerluke3360]

Fantastic ideas ✝️👍🏻

[@Secondisotope]

Nay. I think his critique is specifically on GERMAN* Christianity, as opposed to the more general and universal Christianity. Even his more broad critiques which extended across europe, simply did not leave the borders of Germanic, especially, protestant/individually oriented christianity. Something like that I'd guess.

[@oreocarlton3343]

why orthodoxy? Why not fundamental protestants or Waldensians/Bogumils who are much older than protestants?

[@ThoughtsonThinking]

Well first orthodox means traditional to begin with. Founded in 33 AD. Protestant church seems too complicated in the sense that it was developed from the reformation etc…

[@alwaysgreatusa223]

As if there were something in reality called 'Master Morality' ! You will have as much luck finding such a thing as the social contract, the holy grail, or ferry god mother !

[@fortunatomartino9797]

It was an naive idealism

[@thetruth4654]

It is a psychological observation. Nothing idealistic about it, those that tend to rule in any given culture or society. Tends to live Under opposite morals and values. Then the people beneath them. Those in slave morality tend to talk about Equality, love, happinness. Those with Master Morality do not because there goals and purpose is beyond those concerns. So those at the bottom desire things to become «Equal.» Which is an attack on reality and nature itself, because niether of those things can ever truly exist in reality.

[@alwaysgreatusa223]

@@thetruth4654 THE REAL TRUTH is that the essence of MORALITY is treating others as you would have yourself be treated by others in similar circumstances. It is not so much about equality, as it is about MUTUAL RESPECT. A civil society depends upon this kind of MUTUAL RESPECT as its foundation. While it is true that those in positions of power frequently transgress this fundamental principle of MORALITY by exclusively seeking their own self-advantage at the expense of their fellow citizens, there is nothing moral about their behavior. Their behavior is NOT a different kind of morality, it is simply IMMORALITY ! Moreover, the more they practice this kind of IMMORALITY, the more they threaten the foundation upon which their civil society depends. Man against NATURE is a LOSING BATTLE for man ! That's exactly why men need to COOPERATE and the essence of their cooperation will ultimately always depend upon MUTUAL RESPECT. The ONLY alternative to this is a society that is on its way to DEGENERATING into rampant crime, violence, anarchy, and finally EXTINCTION !!

[@thetruth4654]

Morality is only a concern for those that live within slave morality. The essence of morality is fear. All so-called morality foundation is builtt upon fear.

[@alwaysgreatusa223]

@@thetruth4654 THE REAL TRUTH is that a truly moral person LOVES virtue, and that only those who live outside of LOVE and VIRTUE are the ones who live in a state of CONSTANT FEARFULNESS ! Indeed, their OBSESSION with attempting to achieve ever more power is psychologically motivated by their DEEP-SEATED FEAR OF LIFE & INSECURITY ! It is precisely because of their FEAR that these people do not speak of love and happiness, simply because they KNOW their own DEEP-SEATED INSECURITY prevents them from ever feeling either TRUE LOVE or REAL HAPPINESS !

[@yellowpill0]

If your looking for the type of church that genuinely puts scripture, the Gospel and Jesus first. You'd be better off with a Protestant branch like Baptist or Presbyterian. Orthodox Churches deviate immensely on some teachings of Scripture (for example the establishmnet of the priesthood after Christ ushered in the new covenant after His death)

[@cj548]

Jesus was used the exact same way George Floyd was used. This will help you understand what the message of Jesus is all about

[@youtubedick-tators1991]

Never go full retard

[@jakemitchell5015]

the message of "jesus" was to be a pathetic and weak slave to jews while they destroy and loot everything.

[@brucehitchcock3869]

​​@@jakemitchell5015 Render unto Caesar? Jewish obsessed perhaps? ,,70 AD Rome slaughtered those pesky Jews For courageously resisting their imperialist occupation for centuries . U know , the Maccabees and stuff?

[@ericvulgate]

'he died of a fentanyl overdose for your sins!'

[@cj548]

@@ericvulgate it doesn't matter what actually happened. it's the narrative that sets reality parameters

[@alwaysgreatusa223]

What exactly is beyond good and evil ? Non-value ? The valueless ? That which is neither good nor evil ?

[@rubyboobieee]

It's beyond duality itself. Experiencing everything as one.

[@alwaysgreatusa223]

@@rubyboobieee yeah, a lot of Eastern mystical philosophies and religions are like that.. but it's all BULLSHIT ! Good and Evil are fundamental distinctions for every human being.

[@rubyboobieee]

@Always Great USA well yes, that is how the left hemisphere of our brains sees the world. Our right hemisphere sees everything as the same soup, it makes no separations. It makes you see yourself in others and is the source of feelings like empathy and relatedness to others, and the profound experience you can achieve through prolonged meditation or psychedelics. I recommend the book The Master and his Emissary by Iain Mcgilchrist if you are interested in this.

[@alwaysgreatusa223]

@@rubyboobieee No, I do not have an interest in works of fiction, drugs, nor in psycho-babble. Human beings are compelled by their very nature as conscious living beings to judge some things as being Good and other things as being Evil (or bad). Therefore, Good and Evil are fundamental distinctions for every human being -- just as truth and falsehood are fundamental distinctions. While there are obviously some things to which these concepts do not apply, there is no rational point-of-view in which the same thing is both True and False, or both Good and Evil. Nor is there any rational point-of-view in which all things are one thing, or in which the concepts True and False, or Good and Evil do not necessarily apply to some of the things of our experience. It is simply the case that some things are true, whereas others are false, and that some things are Good and others are Evil (or bad). Of course, I understand that there are irrational perspectives in which these fundamental concepts are dismissed as superficial perspectives. I am very aware of Eastern mysticism, Parmenides, Heraclitus, and all that kind of 'thinking' that attempts to go beyond these fundamental concepts to a supposed 'super-awareness' of the oneness of everything. I simply do not buy into it. My original question was rhetorical.

[@rubyboobieee]

@@alwaysgreatusa223 You don’t buy into it because you haven’t experienced it since being a child. It’s not about thinking, it’s about feeling. Feeling goes beyond thinking. The thinking/rational mind (left hemispheric functions) is what creates distinctions between things. When you stop thinking and just feel, there is no more separation of you from everything else.

[@georgeserban007]

For the simplest term to describe Jesus in a single word that would be a hypocrite. There’s nothing spectacular about him or his teachings

[@loathecraft]

Average atheists who knows nothing about Jesus then claims to know more about Jesus than Christians, typical arrogance that your group has gained for the last few decades in witch it had a monopoly over academia. As a Christian I feel shame for og atheists seeing the new atheists. You aren't a true intellectual threat like the old atheists were. You are just a sum of pseudo-intellectual and arrogant statements witch all are based on the public's literacy of the bible dropping immensely letting you to take things out of context or some times just plain lie about it's content witch I might add you also sometimes plain lie about results of scientific sources in order to claim "soyance is on my side". And don't even get me started on the fake "good faith" atheist debaters witch in reality take everything in a bad faith then say it with nice words to appear like they are using good faith. For example when an atheist KZbin channel ranked reasons to believe in god and just dismissed some cherrypicked logical reasons and then put weak personal testimonies in as highest tier to make their Christian audience begun using those shitty takes. You guys only "win" because you are arguing in echochambers in witch you only allow cherrypicked boomers come in and debate you about god rather then theistic and deistic intellectuals. You are so predictable. You are the modern npcs and your "debates" either are frustratingly stupid or boring.

[@georgeserban007]

@@loathecraft who’s the atheist you’re talking about?

[@JackpotTripleSeven]

Can you elaborate why he is a hypocrite?

[@Exodus26.13Pi]

Dosvosky sorted Nezi out. Dosvosky could sort and human out. If Nezi knew that Hebrew Cosmology is true where would he be. Trust Jesus at 12. Everyday my goal is to be helpful with a good attitude. Easily said...