/lit/ - Literature

>>21622245
You notice how everyone today is an artist nowadays? Maybe it was the right move for someone like Caravaggio because otherwise he might have ended up a Knights of Malta glowie but for the vast majority of people it's something much more banal. And with that comes a lot of responsibility still, perhaps you're right and muhyikk could help in finding our path. We really don't need more rappers

>>21621971
>A bad soul inclines toward bad every time. That is why if forgiven it would seek to return to evil every time for eternity.
If a soul is intrinsically bad by its very nature, that fault belongs to the creator of the soul and not the soul itself. The soul did not choose to exist, much less to have the weak constitution which led to its fall into badness; the soul did not invent itself or invent the mind that it used to make bad decisions. But to even claim that God, who is Goodness itself, created something intrinsically bad, is self-contradicting. If the soul is not intrinsically bad and was created good, and was meant by its creator for good, then the creator in his omnipotence must surely have some method available of restoring the soul to its original goodness, even with free will in play.

>The body indeed introduces defects and emotions but separate the soul from the body and the soul is a perfectly rationale being.
If the soul is perfectly rational, there is no logical reason why it should be evil. A perfectly rational being would always choose the objectively correct and rational thing to do - to act contrary would necessarily require some defect in that soul (whether internal or external) such as insanity, delusion, or ignorance, that prevents it from exercising perfect rationality. To argue otherwise would be to posit that it is, in fact, a perfectly rational action to willingly reject the source of all goodness, being, life, truth, happiness, and logic itself, a proposition that is itself quite unequivocally insane.

>One who sins willfully, would will the death of God to commit its sins with impunity.
God, per almost all accepted definitions of theism, is actively sustaining the existence of every being at every instant, actually supplying it with its very own powers of thought and rationality. That a being would will the source and upholder of its own existence dead indicates either that this soul is completely insane and not in any way lucid enough to be held responsible for its actions, or else that the assertion that nonbeing is superior to being is in fact logically valid, and can be held by a rational mind.

>Eternal punishment is a necessity.
Annihilation of the soul in question would solve the problem just as easily, and without the continuous suffering of one of God's beloved creatures.