>>25060482
>In the aesthetic warfare between the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament
Reminder that this dullard used to dream about Falstaff and Sancho Panza getting into epic duels of wit

>>25060482
By that logic Moses wasn’t a Jew

>>25060482
> In the aesthetic warfare between the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament, there is just no contest,

Such horseshit, the OT is utterly nonsensical stone age scrawl that contributed nothing to human morality. The NT actually made the OT salvageable and synthesized Buddhist and Mendaean philosophy perfectly.

>>25060491
I would also like to see Falstaff speak circles around Sancho

>>25060501
Abraham was the first Jew

>>25060501
I think Moses was a Levite.
It's a family of twelve boys making of the tribes of Israel, their father. Jude and Benjamin made up the "Jews" way after the exodus. The other ten tribes got taken as slaves to Persia. (It's all myth of course)

>>25060506
>Jesus synthesized Buddhist and Mendaean philosophy perfectly

This may be the most reddit statement I have read thus far this year

Bloom never exactly hid he prefers the Gnostic Christian texts like the Gospel of Thomas over the majority of the texts that made it into the New Testament.

>>25060554
Kind of strange for a Gnostic to consider Yahweh to be the greatest character in all of literature, as Bloom has said he does, and condemn Christian writings for contradicting the OT, since Gnostics tend to have a less-than-favorable view of the OT and Yahweh as depicted therein

>>25060540
The Northern Tribes are scattered by the Assyrians. The Book of Tobit takes place in their exile.

>>25060583
>>25060540
Also the Persians aren't a thing this far back. The first "Persian" empire unifying Persia under the Medes is the empire that conquers Babylon (who had destroyed the Southern Kingdom and had their elites in exile in Babylon) and then releases the Jewish elite to rebuild Jerusalem as vassals. They don't accept the remaining Hebrews, who had intermarried (a major issue for Ezra and Nehemia, but also for the author of Ruth). Esther takes place during the Exile too, and Daniel, and Ezekiel.

This isn't myth, at least in broad outline. It is well attested from other sources. The parts of the Hebrew Scriptures that are harder to pin down are the early unified kingdom and the parts before that, e.g., Joshua, Judges, the Exodus. But there is pretty solid textual evidence to support the idea that the author of the David Story (both books of Samuel and the opening of I Kings) was a single author likely living not that long after David or Solomon's reign. There are a lot of careful parallelisms and literary motifs. The text was later edited by others it would seem, but the core story seems to be the work of one man. Ezekiel is like this too, although there there is more overwhelming consensus that it is the work of one man because of the style and the very odd visions and tales of paralysis.

>>25060528
Falstaff couldn't even speak a circle around himself.

>>25060597
Oh and I should add that this isn't unique. Everything that far back is pretty fuzzy. This is prior to Homer even.

File: autism-word-on-red-keyboard-260nw-510112627 (1).jpg (30.6 KB)

30.6 KB JPG

>>25060597
>>25060601
>Also
>Oh I should add

>>25060600
His girth defeats measurement. He is a man so great he encompasses all within his circumference.

>>25060482
this is not even remotely controversial
the NT was written in mostly poor greek while the OT had close to a thousand years of revisions. Of course the OT his of higher literarily quality

>>25060583
>Assyria
Ah yes
>>25060597
>This isn't myth
I mean the part about being kept as slaves in Kemet/Egypt, never happened, and the whole "Muh boy's potency founded whole TRIBES, man!" bullshit. The OT is full of ridiculous embellishments to chronicle some truths

>>25060643
The NT has four revisions of the same story

>>25060554
>Jesus lived and died with Yahweh, Cristkeks need to get that through their thick heads
>"Jesus was a Jew, certainly a much better Jew than I am."
>Gnostic

>>25060530
>>25060540
Didn't know they read the Talmud.

>>25061449
Pop quiz, who wrote the Talmud?

>>25061455
Satan

>>25061456
Damn, and the Harry Potter books? Guy is sure eclectic

>>25060482
>Jesus lived and died with Yahweh. He was no Christian, which is something that Christians can’t seem to get through their heads.
Jesus was a Christian because Christianity is defined as compatibility with the teachings of Jesus

>>25060501
fpbp

File: Jn-5-45.jpg (16.6 KB)

16.6 KB JPG

>>25060501

Bloom looks so sad in all his pics. Deep down inside he always knew hell was waiting for him.

>>25060482
Bloom said that he couldn't make sense of any "oriental" spirituality--which is crazy and almost admirable to admit

>>25060553
Since when are Schopenhauer and Richard Wagner reddit?

>>25061491
The vast majority of Christians, historically and today, would have Jesus crucified if he came again among us. Bloom wouldn't follow him either -- he'd probably be in the corner marveling at the enigmatic personality, and quoting Whitman to himself.

He looks like my aunt Carol.

>>25063619
Admiring those two as thinkers is extraordinarily reddit

File: EM JONES 2.jpg (102.6 KB)

102.6 KB JPG

>>25060482
>this is your brain on Antichrist typology

File: MV5BMTgyNTU3MzIzN15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMDA2MDY2NDE@._V1_.jpg (1.4 MB)

1.4 MB JPG

>>25063641
>this is your brain on antiscience theology

>>25063641
>>25063648
lol they look like twins
>>25063633
Its not lol. It kind of reminds me of midwits favorite insult, "midwit", which anyway has ceased to be useful. No offense

>>25063695
Sounds like someone was outted as a midwit one-too-many times on this board

>>25063699
Never actually been called a midwit on this board until right now. Just retarded, pretty much constantly

>>25063701
Perhaps that is more apt. Most retards can be recognized by having seeing no opera but Wagner, let alone ballet or theatre

>>25060482
Why post this repeatedly as if its profound?

>>25060482
>Jesus lived and died with Yahweh. He was no Christian, which is something that Christians can’t seem to get through their heads.
Jesus was the first Christian. He ceased being a Jew when his own people rejected his teachings. Trying to call him Rabbi Jesus or insisting he is jewish would be like dead naming a tranny. He didnt identify that way.

>>25060482
This is a very interesting book. He makes a prediction of Christian v Islam war, which certainly didn't age well. More likely for American Christians to follow the path of Andrew Tate
>>25063703
I know you are a homosexual -- I won't even use it as an insult.

>>25063711
Idiocracy

Jesus never existed.

>>25063641
>>25063648
Why do they both have bow ties and look alike?

>>25063724
How can I be for certain you do? You could just be the Chinese room for all I care.

>>25063711
>More likely for American Christians to follow the path of Andrew Tate
So what you're saying is that in order to be a valid Christian you have engage in underage sex trafficking?

>>25063731
i'll stab you

>writes and publishes his cringe gnostic novel
>goes back to bitchin
kek

>>25063735
Ah yes, the atheist reveals himself to be ultimately devoid of morals and nothing more than an impulse machine. Who's pavlov's good boy? You are!

File: Pol_Pot_(cropped) (4).jpg (30.4 KB)

30.4 KB JPG

>>25063703

>>25063745
what does this mean?
>>25063707
I think Bloom is riffing (in, excuse the expression, a jewy way) off a comment of Nietzsche's where he said Christ was the only Christian, pointing out the extent to which Christian are merely following their instincts. Nietzsche's entire work can be read as a struggle against hypocrisy, of which he was morbidly sensitive to the point of preferring "evil" rather than resembling Christians (who are all presumptuous and vulgar hypocrites).

>>25063758
Read what he said and then read the modus operandi of what Pol Pot.

>>25063801
*what Pol Pot said

>>25063745
>>25063716

>>25060560
The gospel of Thomas is very different from other gnostic texts. It actually affirms the physical incarnation and lightly implies the crucifixion (or at least his death)

File: American-literary-critic-and-author-Harold-Bloom-1986.jpg (25 KB)

25 KB JPG

>>25063903
>Unlike the canonical gospels, that of Judas Thomas the Twin spares us the crucifixion, makes the resurrection unnecessary, and does not present us with a God named Jesus. No dogmas could be founded upon this sequence (if it is a sequence) of apothegms. If you turn to the Gospel of Thomas, you encounter a Jesus who is unsponsored and free. No one could be burned or even scorned in the name of this Jesus, and no one has been hurt in any way, except perhaps for those bigots, high church or low, who may have glanced at so permanently surprising a work.

>>25063914
This guy could be the most interesting and insightful as well as the stupidest. Judaism makes people stupid. Do you guys know his last words? He sent an email to David Bentley Hart about his universalism book and said, “I found your book deeply moving … etc. … but I don’t believe it.

>>25063976
Arguably the only based thing he said in his whole life

>>25064029
He said a lot of based things. There's a anecdote of Wagner wiring to the King explaining why Jews were so attached to him--they seem to still possess an instinct for what is old and genuine. Strange but true.

>>25064089
He's the Dennis Prager of literature and basically only extolled for writing a canon and for his dislike of wokenessmar

>>25064141
That analogy says more about you than anything

>>25064150
You say that but what follows is true. He hasn't actually contributed or added anything original to literary criticism and the affection for him here has to do with the school of resentment, and his canon, which I highly doubt he himself read in its entirety. Everything he says is just platitudes or stating the very obvious or silly generalizations. If you read his thoughts on the Divine Comedy, for instance, you can see he lacks any original or creative thinking whatsoever, unless it is to randomly shoehorn his hobbyhorse, gnosticism, into texts as he did with Blood Meridian, something he originally found shocking due to the violence, as if classical works didn't often feature extensive and graphic violence, as if the Hebrew Bible he loves so much (it is, granted, good literature) as literature wasn't a major source of the violent imagery in Blood Meridian. Anyone who read half as much as he made believe he read, would surely have bothered to learn more languages.

No, I cannot take him seriously, nor can I take anyone seriously who takes him seriously

>>25064166
His formulation of anxiety of influence was groundbreaking. I doubt you are more intelligent than he is, and I take everyone seriously so you are simply being led by an insecure and petty egoism. Blood Meridian is a stupid book

>>25063633
Reddit is built on a sandcastle of misandry. Schopenhauer completely flies in the face of that. And Richard Wagner has a sizeable national socialist fanbase, wouldn't fly, either. I fail to see how that aligns with Reddit's supposed "values" or lackthereof.

>>25060482
Awful take. Revelation is obviously more aesthetically interesting than anything in the OT.

>>25064178
>His formulation of anxiety of influence was groundbreaking.

Are you fucking serious? It might have been if he wrote about it maybe a century earlier


>I doubt you are more intelligent than he is
I don't write books of literary criticism and expect to be taken seriously as an academic. If someone is a professional mathematician and you say, "I doubt you know maths better than he does," it's a dubious endorsement

>Blood Meridian is a stupid book

Neither here nor there, has absolutely nothing to do with Bloom's inane interpretation of it as a Gnostic work

>>25064212
>Are you fucking serious?
Please tell me who expressed this idea as he did? It's justly famous, even the phrase "anxiety of influence" is very useful. Obviously it is not an original concept but nothing true is original. And he was a very subtle reader who could pick up influences. This is actually may be regarded Jewish trait and you wouldn't expect this ability from a real genius. And he was to the point and didn't dress up his writing in academic convention. He just said how he felt, however repetitively.
Bloom had a genuine love for literature which was infectious. I don't really know what you think you are trying to accomplish, I just think you are insecure and probably used to admire him.

>>25064226
The idea was first articulated by Livy in the introduction to his history. It's been articulated countless times and talking about it in literary criticism is the critical equivalent to a poet writing another variation on, Roses are red/violets are blue.

>Jewish trait

Please read any serious literary scholarship. Literary criticism, especially for older works, goes over influences with a fine-tooth comb. Even any copy with decent annotations and supplementary material goes over in influences.

If Bloom had a deep passion for literature, as in religiously devout sort of passion, he would have learned other languages. He loved literature but no more than you or I, and could never fully commit himself to it for the simple reason that he was capable of putting himself in the shoes of another but not in the mind of another. He could never entertain ideas without believing them, in other words, which made it impossible for him to see things from the eyes of anyone who might have totally different, even eccentric, beliefs. Every poet he likes, he says sees poetry as he does. Every great writer understands literature as he does. And if they don't he is either just dismissive, or hostile. He resembles how Tolstoy describes Anna Karenina's husband, actually, who loves the arts and literature and Beethoven but feels acutely uncomfortable trying to imagine anyone thinking very different from how he does or feeling very different

>>25064239
> He resembles how Tolstoy describes Anna Karenina's husband,
This is just ridiculous and idiotic
>The idea was first articulated by Livy in the introduction to his history
I don't think so. For better or worse poetic influence was never described in such violent terms, even of despair. This is certainly not how Goethe regarded influence. There's him complaining about Byron speculating about where he got certain things from -- when he reflects he is a child, no I got them from life, just because things are repeated doesn't mean they were stolen, life itself repeats and is eternal. But there's the hidden attitude or sensibility which isn't really about a "fine-tooth comb", that's a bad metaphor. You'll be happier if you appreciate people for the merits they bring. And no great writers are rarely great critics. It's a very different talent. Best critical talents are Nietzsche, W. Lewis, and Weininger but they are full of bizarre aberrations.

>>25064280
Livy says simply that is another person writing a history of Rome and that the motive for the that people generally have is improvement over their predecessors either in facts, or in beauty of style, and if he fails--his project was fucking enormous--then he will at least derive consolation from being in the shade of his betters, and at finding better peace of mind writing than current events would give him.

If you read Kafka's diaries, the anxiety for him is that he is driven to write, that he feels he will go insane being subjected to unmitigated reality without the consolation of writing, and I think a lot of writers felt that way. They found relief from their angst in writing. The fact that it was competitive didn't make them more anxious, just more ambitious. Dante did not feel any angst whatsoever in contending with the giants of poetry, he presented one as his guide in fact.

Bloom describes it in overly-dramatic terms because he has zero creative talent and actually creating something to him is like a daydream, and daydreams are always much more dramatic than in real life. Pointing out that no artist or writer ever saw it as dramatically as he did, does not lend him credibility. You say writers cannot do criticism as well as critics but they can certainly describe their own feelings better that critics can.

My favorite literary critic is Samuel Johnson.