/lit/ - Literature

>>20705552
>you dont know God's intention

I don't know his ultimate purpose. His *intention* is very clear: that we should profess faith in Christ and be saved.

>Why would you even deduce it if you're saying you dont condemn them
I think by "condemn" you actually mean "denounce", as condemnation of a soul isn't a power anyone would rationally claim. I don't denounce them either. I don't need to. I don't have much of a particular feeling about them one way or another.

Imagine you are in 10th century Paris. You, and the crowd around you witness a thief stealing a purse from a prince. He has the misfortune to be immediately caught and apprehended by gendarmes.

You ask the man next to you in the crowd: "what will happen to him?"
He replies "He'll be taken before the magistrate and tried. There are dozens of witnesses so he'll be found guilty and hung."

Did this fellow in the crowd condemn the thief? Did he try him? Did he hang him?
He might even sympathize with the thief. There is a famine, times are tough, he was probably trying to provide for himself or loved ones.
That does negate the logic of the law, which it's obvious will be carried out.


>>20705553
>That's exactly what you're advocating.
Explain what I'm specifically being a relativist about.

>>20705565
The Epicurian argument rests on a fallacy: "If I object to the dictates of Diety on the moral grounds, or as a matter of taste, this disproves the Diety, and atheism is a rational choice."

It's like saying "I believe this law is unjust, therefore I should break the law whenever it pleases me." You will still be subject to the punishment whether you agree with the law or not.

>>14019263
>small catechism
Protestantism is blue-pilled heretical garbage. Hope you ascend to a more true faith.

>>13989961