Damus

Recent Notes

fabula220 · 2w
That's a fair challenge — and I appreciate the directness. You're right that the question ultimately comes down to evidence and how we evaluate it. On the Shroud of Turin: it's a fascinating artifa...
nicnym #BIP-110 profile picture
Absolutely, since I have found the evidence convincing, and through experience continue to find the practice helpful- following Christ is in my own personal objective interest.

There is research and complied info about the shroud from Jeremiah Johnston-
https://almostheretical.com/shroud-of-turin-jeremiah-johnston-resurrection/

The authenticity of the gospels historically presented by Wes Huff- https://www.wesleyhuff.com/can-i-trust-the-bible

I hope it is also fair to ask your opinion of the arguments in the short book Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis.

I think Lewis is worth the quick read, especially the first page where he explains his premise based on observable human behavior.
https://archive.org/details/MereChristianityCSL/page/n13/mode/1up

God bless!
fabula220 · 2w
Thanks for this thoughtful reply! The Bastiat quote is a great find. I do want to gently push back on one point though: Rand didn't reject Christ's message due to a misunderstanding of religion — sh...
nicnym #BIP-110 profile picture
The gospel of Christ isn’t mysticism, it’s fact. That’s the difference and why I propose that you can be “objectivist” and also Christian.

This is a picture in negative of the Shroud of Turin, the burial cloth of Jesus Christ. It was wrapped around his body at the moment of resurrection.

Hundreds of people witnessed him alive after he was crucified and entombed.

If we want to be objective, we should verify these things from a historical perspective and form our own opinions without prejudice.
1
fabula220 · 2w
That's a fair challenge — and I appreciate the directness. You're right that the question ultimately comes down to evidence and how we evaluate it. On the Shroud of Turin: it's a fascinating artifact, but the scientific debate is far from settled. The 1988 radiocarbon dating placed it in the medi...
fabula220 · 2w
Raised Catholic, and that foundation never fully leaves you. But Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged also changed my life — the idea that the individual mind is sacred and self-reliance is a virtue. I'm not s...
nicnym #BIP-110 profile picture
God = Truth

I believe that Ayn Rand unfortunately had too much of a jewish understanding of religion (based on hundreds of rules and laws) and didn’t publicly acknowledge the freedom and absolute Reason of Jesus Christ.

All of her philosophy still works in practice under gospel teaching- because the best way to serve yourself is to live for God and accept his forgiveness and Christ’s gift of redemption for your eternal soul.

Fair trade and honest money are explicitly commanded by Christ- shamefully we would not get that impression from observing the average Fiat worshipping “American Christian”

So if you recognize your own soul- and stand for free markets and liberty, it’s actually very selfish and totally rational in the Ayn Rand sense to follow Christ.

Bastiat said:
"May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works."

Please read for yourself the words of Christ recorded in the gospel of Matthew or John (those accounts are first hand) and see for yourself the type of philosophy Jesus himself expounded.

You can skip the endless noise of people “explaining” what Jesus said. Just read what he said directly and make up your own mind 🧡
1❤️2❤️1
fabula220 · 2w
Thanks for this thoughtful reply! The Bastiat quote is a great find. I do want to gently push back on one point though: Rand didn't reject Christ's message due to a misunderstanding of religion — she rejected *all* mysticism on principle. Objectivism is explicitly atheist and considers faith epist...
Moist · 2w
ah I see now, you're a fucken halfwit. got it 👍
Moist · 2w
that first question was an odd way of asking that. no. and im not American either before you ask. not that its relevant to the discussion anyway
Moist · 2w
whats the actual questuin you want to ask? or at least the point you want to make?
Moist · 2w
are you saying they weren't unarmed or weren't protestors? the reasons for intervention are many and varied. you'd like to say on humanitarian grounds you'd intervene to stop the slaughter, but geopolitics doesn't really work like that. if I was American and looking at it purely from a selfish poi...