/lit/ - Literature

>>12110386
Confessions by St. Augustine.
The world is full of injustice and pain due to the privation of good, which is God. In other words, there is evil, injustice and pain because of the absence of God, not because of God.
Fry should see pic related.

Have you not even read Dostoyevsky?

>>12110386
He's 100% correct. The irnony of Americans saying he isn't is hilarious. The same god loving country of the USA is directly responsible for the suffering of so much of the world. The belief in god did this. Iraq, Afghanistan, libya just off the top of my head. And if you believe the people who did these things didn't believe in god, then why did they do it? Hint: It's money. But does that mean capitalism is inherently evil?

Just food for thought

>>12110392
>suffer more pain in Hell
lol

>>12110386
Dumb bait thread, read Job.

>>12110386
>why should I respect the Maker of The Universe?
Is this a serious question? Because he made a fucking Universe. His motifs and aspirations are far beyond what my tiny monkey brain can possibly comprehend. Projecting my primitive human nature and interpreting His actions as "meaniehead" and "poo poo dummie" is not serious. It's also incredibly arrogant to assume that the Maker owes it to you to make the world a place of happy ponies and nice plushie toys

Take the Leibnizpill

>>12110386
>"stupid God that creates a world that is so full of injustice and pain?"
why can't he just be honest? it's cause he's a shitstabber

>>12110421
It's also incredibly arrogant to assume that the Maker owes it to you to make the world a place of happy ponies and nice plushie toys

But it's worth asking the question as to why it didn't.

*fucks a teenage boy in the ass*
Yup, religion is dumb

Why did God create fags like Stephen Fry?

>>12110444
Why did God create demons?
Earthquakes?
Death?
Destruction?

>>12110396
>And if you believe the people who did these things didn't believe in god, then why did they do it?

Mossad and AIPAC.

>>12110386
Book of Job.

>>12110444
The existence of homosexual predators like Fry gives his young victims the opportunity to reject their shame and self-hatred thus increasing virtue and reaffirming faith in the law of God. Remember that God this is a system of delicate balance and some amount of suffering must always be present to give grounds for virtue to flourish. Many of those that are put to the test fail and few stand victorious, but this is all according to how it was revealed to St. John on Patmos.

Imagine being a father and having a drunk, bloated Fry show up on your doorstep at 2am, asking for your son. You can see the hunger in his eyes. You know you can't stop him. You know if you even lay a hand on him, you'll be imprisoned for hate crimes against a sexual minority. With a trembling finger, you point to your son's room. Within minutes, they are joined in unholy union, your son screaming as his asshole is shredded.

It last until dawn.

>>12110421
>Oh yeah Daddy shit on me i love you

The problem of evil has been asked since the dawn of religion, it's nothing new. Go read some theodicies.

(((Stephen Fry)))

>>12110514
fuck, look at that kid's eyes

he's been through some shit

>>12110386
>treasure of bong
>dugusting old pederast

>>12110386
>I have a superior sense of morality than the being that gave me my morality.

>>12110514
This is vile and disgusting and precisely the reason why homosexuals should be executed by the state. They intentionally prey on young boys or men to spread their disease.

>>12110467
>The existence of homosexual predators like Fry gives his young victims the opportunity to reject their shame and self-hatred thus increasing virtue and reaffirming faith in the law of God

>be kid who gets molested by ordained minister
>this is supposed to "increase faith in the law"

b-bravo God

>>12110600
Christ never claimed the lives of the faithful few would be without struggle.

Is the alternative much better? That we are just shit creatures almost by nature?

>>12110605
He leads them into struggle; not sin. That is Satan's doing. I fear you may be that Calvinist who always posts here.

>be God
>create the world, fill it with humans, give them free will
>"Enjoy it my chil-"
>humans start killing, deceiving, and sodomizing each other
>one of the sodomites takes a moment from thrusting into a young boy's bleeding asshole and looks to the sky
>'Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God that creates a world that is so full of injustice and pain?'

>>12110619
>implying the victim of a predator is a sinner
>implying an ordained man can not be a hypocrite and a sinner
What did he mean by this?

>>12110421
All sense of meaning and moral justification come entirely from our own rational thought-categories and conceptions. It is immediately absurd to suggest that anything can be made "beyond" the possibility of human judgment, human judgment is the only arbiter there is. If there is such a thing as a God then he would be judged by our standards like everything else in the universe.

If God is a moral agent acting with a will, then his apparently omnipotent power do not reduce his culpability, they precisely make it matter more. Is a president of a country less culpable for his crimes than a local doughnut salesman? If God can do anything, this does not absolve him of a trial.

>>12110627
The point is one of humility. Yes you can judge God but you're just arrogant beyond belief as most rationalists are if you consider that.

>dude just subjugate your own personal autonomy and judgement lmao
Is there anything more cucked than Christianity?

>>12110625
Cringe

>>12110627
You're basically a cockroach witnessing the first nuclear testing going "Man, why would these humans do that?"

>>12110396
>bad things committed in the name of God = God’s will
Suddam also tortured thousands of his own people. People are cunts and I doubt anyone understands God’s will.

>>12110597
>a picture of Fry and a boy together means that Fry definitely fucked him.
Christcucks are so delusional.

>>12110661
They are quite literally fag married, so I would be quite surprised if he didn't.

>>12110597

This is vile and disgusting and precisely the reason why heterosexuals should be executed by the state. They intentionally prey on young girls or women to spread their seed.

>>12110661
Future risk is the real danger.

>>12110624
Fry is talking about natural evil, not moral evil

>>12110657
>I doubt anyone understands God’s will.
I thought God was all-powerful. Why did he choose to fail? Or maybe he couldn't possibly succeed because he doesn't exist?!

>>12110649
Huh? But cockroaches can't talk...

>>12110675
He didn't fail, everything is optimized.

>it's a self-proclaimed "rational atheist" uses an emotional argument to try and disprove God episode

>>12110665
Then you can consider yourself surprised, Fry has publically Stated that be doesnt fuck his 30 years younger partner in the ass

>>12110386
I think what he meant to say was
>I don't want believe in a god that won't let be bum 18 year old boys

>>12110667
The boy was corrupted by his enticement of celebrity, perhaps loneliness, and initial offerings of some sort of friendship.
Homosexuals will attempt to solicit heterosexuals; and even go as far as enticing children with bright colored rainbows.
>>12110681
Sounds like an elaborate legal defense.

>>12110680
Everything concerning God and religion is purely emotional. So why not use an emotional argument?

>>12110687
>Homosexuals will attempt to solicit heterosexuals
How is this any different from rich old straight men enticing young girls? They both end in a disgusting sex act, doesn't really matter if its homo or hetero.

I refuse to listen to anything said by a sodomite unless it's their screams on a stake.

>>12110386
https://williamarkle.blogspot.com/2016/06/letter-from-father-by-william-arkle.html?m=1
It's all a test and completely justified by how comfortable afterlife is

>>12110386
What a childish question. Everyone knows God is testing us. It's like that with any religion. So we can understand that this world was not meant as reward nor as punishment but only as a testing ground to see how we will spend our time here. And when we die we will either to paradise or hellfire

>>12110736
>baby is born without sight or hearing and dies a month later of its painful, incurable skin condition

>>12110736
>"this is all just a test bro haha"

>>12110722
>"better luck in the next life bro xD"

>>12110722
>>12110736
If it were just a test, why are the "questions" and "difficulties" randomly generated? It is the equivalent of giving out papers to fifth graders some of which contain simple arithmetic and the others differential calculus yet grading each at the same level and calling that fair.

>>12110753
>gets to go straight to heaven, no chance to fuck up or prolonged suffering
I'd change places t b h
>>12110760
They aren't
Because not everyone is at the same leven of spiritual maturity, and we each need to learn different lessons from our lives

>baby is born without sight or hearing and dies a month later of its painful, incurable skin condition
>>12110736
>"this is all just a test bro haha"
>>12110722
>"better luck in the next life bro xD"

>>12110386
I went to a catholic school, and it was explained like this.

In Genesis, there was water before God began creating. In essence, this is all the bad stuff in the world. God creates the Earth, it's animals, and mankind. And it was Good.
God is fundamentally good. God cannot do evil. All evil is a product of Satan or mankinds free will. God lets us make those decisions, and he still loves us, but he has to let us make those decisions.
Sorry if this doesn't make sense, I just woke up.

>>12110393
What should I start with?

>>12110768
There are people who live shielded from any real hardship. How are they going to mature? Really, it isn't fair to them because they never need to seek God. I don't see why privileged hedge fund children would waste one second of a thought on the divine. Why? Their lives are already paradisaical. Such is the province of the poor and the disabled.

>>12110772
>God lets us make those decisions, and he still loves us, but he has to let us make those decisions.
If god is all-powerful he could literally show up once and prove his existence in the age of cell phone cameras. Do you realize how infinitely better the world would be if people had actual proof that god existed instead of relying on brainwashing little children with notions that are misinterpreted 100% of the time?

>>12110720
Based and BAPTIZE em (with fire).

>>12110788
It'll all be okay on the other side
They have their own challenges
>>12110794
That would mess up God's school because free will would be irrelevant

>>12110386
Any art book that teaches shading. If you want beauty you need ugly to compare to. Otherwise it is just flat. Depth and demention, and encapsulated in them beauty, require a play of light and dark to make the best work.

>>12110386
Summa Teologiae by Aquinas.

>>12110817
>That would mess up God's school because free will would be irrelevant
That makes no fucking sense? Having scientific proof that the Earth isn't flat is not an obstacle to my free will. God allegedly showed up several times to people already according to the Bible, why can't he show up now and settle the debate of his existence once and for all? Has he become shy all of a sudden?

>>12110839
That was Old Covenant times, Jesus already came down and saved us all, no need for God to mess with anything before the Antichrist arrives

>>12110854
>no need for God to mess with anything
Why? He's all-powerful, why not? Does it cost him precious effort? Is your god lazy?

>>12110720
I would let you put me on your stake if you know what I mean.

>>12110862
No, everything is just going according to plan
God wants us to (try our best to) be good out of our own free will, not because we feel forced or compelled to do so, which we would if we didn't have to have faith

>>12110878
>not because we feel forced or compelled to do so, which we would if we didn't have to have faith
And again, this makes no sense. Being able to make informed decisions is not detrimental to free will. This faith thing is retarded. You don't refuse to explain a theorem because people 'should have faith'.

What kind of petty god refuses to prove himself to the world because he wants people to blindly follow a book?

And why did he need to show up in the past if the believed so much in faith? Why did he have to show up and explain shit to characters in the scriptures? Did he believe that those characters weren't faithful enough to just follow his will?

>Obliterates atheist """""intellectuals"""""

>>12110898
Because like every father, he wants us to grow up and stop being children who have to be told what to do all of the time
>And why did he need to show up in the past if the believed so much in faith? Why did he have to show up and explain shit to characters in the scriptures? Did he believe that those characters weren't faithful enough to just follow his will?
Everything has to start somewhere, we're more mature now

>>12110933
>we're more mature now
true dat, in fact the number of atheists has doubled in the last generation

>>12110898
>What kind of petty god refuses to prove himself to the world because he wants people to blindly follow a book?
This world would stop feeling real if we knew for sure God existed
The point isn't making sure we all behave well, it's precisely because God wants to see if we can behave ourselves when we're left alone for a change

>>12110964
>This world would stop feeling real if we knew for sure God existed
Why? Isn't god real?
>>12110964
>God wants to see if we can behave ourselves
We clearly can't. Why doesn't he try to fix shit?

>>12110960
You're half right but atheism is spiritual adolescence
We're meant to grow up eventually and have a mature relationship with God, just like adult children and their parents

>>12110977
>atheism is spiritual adolescence
>hurrrr if you're atheist you're incomplete

>>12110971
Yes, but the whole point would be ruined if we knew for sure
>We clearly can't. Why doesn't he try to fix shit?
No point in ruining the game for those who can
>>12110990
It's true
Adult children usually stop rebelling and realize that their parents only want what's best for them

>>12110995
You are calling atheists children. Are you really resorting to ad hominems? Do you really think you're more mature than be before you don't ask questions?

>>12110995
>but the whole point would be ruined if we knew for sure
you still have no argument for this.

>>12110995
adult children stop rebelling because they know their parents actually exist

>>12111008
*more mature than me because you don't ask questions?

>>12111012
?
>>12111008
You're not disproving what I said so idk how to reply
>you still have no argument for this.
The entire point of life is suffering and how we can handle it
Only atheists whine about it because they think this is all we have, while everyone else realizes that not having any help from God before afterlife is the whole point

>>12111022
I don't have any questions to ask though?

>>12111035
Is it because you're afraid that everything will fall apart once you do?

>>12111041
No, it's because I know the answer to everything

>>12110386
Atheists and Christians should be good friends. I believe the best Christians are cut from atheist cloth.

The irrational denial of lack of evidence for God does Christianity no favors. The fact that the universe is massive, cold, apparently lifeless, devoid of meaning, etc. is something Christians should also enthusiastically acknowledge. A belief in Christ does not have to be exclusive from those assertions - in fact they should be part of the rock of faith, because they are obvious.

So, building up from those assertions, we transcend nihilism and make a choice - in the face of the eternal void we say no, not today, we dance and sing the song of a meaningful life, we celebrate our brief moment on the stage, the meaninglessness of it, and become something more.

>>12111045
>I know the answer to everything
Are you listening to yourself, how fucking delusional you are?

>>12111066
I meant about life, God, universe, etc

The Bible is open for interpretation and thus fails it its goal.

Try to disprove me.

>>12111091
What's the goal of the Bible?

>>12111045
What number am i thinking of?

>>12110386
Why would God create an unhappy place for us? Because not everyone worships the Christian God and punishes accordingly. Also, without challenges, there would be no merit in judgement. If the world was easy peasy lemon squeezy, everyone would pass judgement and walk into heaven, which is explicitly not for everyone.

>>12111113
>punishes accordingly
lol
>explicitly not for everyone
lol

>>12111091
>a book written following the directives a superior intelligence that's beyond human comprehension, written by multiple authors,written in a language that's open for interpretation is open for intepretation
colour me surprised.

>>12111113
Read
>>12110722
tldr: Hell doesn't exist, everyone makes it to Heaven eventually after their soul has lived enough lives to learn all the lessons needed

>>12111111
111111?

>>12111138
holy shit

>>12111111
Checked, keked, and rekt

>>12111124
>after their soul has lived enough lives to learn all the lessons needed
Citation needed

>>12110386
> Cause injustice and pain to others
> Somehow the world is now full of injustice and pain (whoa)
> It's totally God's fault tho
Whew, laddie.

>>12110667
> spread their disease
> spread their seed
Like, totally no difference at all, totally.

>>12111165
actually there is a difference. the seed's effect lasts a lot longer.

Answer to Job

>>12110396
>Bush was sincerely religious.
Even you aren't that naive.
>why did they do it? what caused it? what made them do it? what external circumstance caused it all?
Maybe they did it because they could? Maybe people don't need a reason to do evil?
It's not a pleasant conclusion, but you can only shift blame for so long. It's neither Capitalism nor Satan. Just human nature in its purest form.

>>12110386
Yes. The Bible. In fact just read Genesis.

>>12110396
>Americans
Protestantism is built on Pride, the keystone sin.

>>12110393
I hate what Jordan Peterson has done to this board.

Everyone is treating some Russian dude's musings on morality as fucking gospel, as if pretty much every one of his contemporaries weren't busy drawing the opposite conclusions

>>12111218
Catholicism is literally idol worship.

>>12111103
To stand the test of time and be extremely relevant to cultures and civilizations completely different from a bunch of desert tribes and Mediterranean empires, even thousands of years into the future.
>Why didn't Jesus speak clearly, and not in parables and metaphors?
He knew exactly what he was doing.

>>12110386
Because he is God, it would be your best interest to not piss him off especially if he's a cunt

You wouldn't understand justice if there was no injustice.

>>12111264
newfriend detected
dosto worship especially by reactionaries long predates peterson

>>12110386
>what is the book of Job
>what is Leibniz' Theodicy
I mean, I'm an atheist, but that argument is plainly stupid.

most injustice and pain is caused by man, not god

>>12111386
>what is the book of Job
Nonsensical cuckoldry that provides no answer to the problem of evil beyond 'dude I'm god fuck you lmao'.

>>12110386
When you realize that one of the things that god is is a personification of nature that allows people to use their intuition and ability to interact with personalities as a way to structure a functional way of relating to the world you will realize that this idea is childish wishful thinking.

>>12110644
>>12110649
>meandering in moral nihilism

So THIS is the power of Theodicy.

>>12110392

A claim as profound as it is intellectually vigorous.

>>12110775
Crime and Punishment

>>12111264
>Everyone is treating some Russian dude's musings on morality as fucking gospel,
We've been doing that since long before Peterson you fucking bozo

>>12110392
If God is all powerful, why is he absent? If evil is due to the lack of God, why does he let it happen? Why did he create a world where suffering exists to such a degree for not only humans but all animals? He could fix it all in a second, but doesn’t. Setting up life in a giant gladiator match for survival on Earth is truly a cruel act when he could have created paradise.

>>12112971
Look what God did to Job, someone who worshipped him, just to prove a petty point. If a human did that to another person we would call them a psychopath

Sounds like he has a problem more with humanity than god desu

>>12113012
God created the flawed humanity, and other living things are also hopelessly cruel. This is his fault.

>>12113012
>Sounds like he has a problem more with humanity than god desu
How do you explain genetic birth defects, cancer, and all number of horrific diseases not attributable to human behavior? The physical manifestation of sin or some equivalent handwave?

>>12112971

Catholicism is Atheism.

>>12112971
The only answer to this is a Dualistic theology where an equally powerful good and evil God are fighting for supremacy or Gnosticism where the Demiurge himself is powerful but flawed, arrogant, and naive. Christianity has no good response to this.

>>12113046
Christians don’t actually believe their own theology. I often see them saying evil people were possessed by the devil or that the devil is behind bad things like natural disasters and plagues. That there is some sort of battle between good and evil where God wins during Revelations. Yet God is all powerful and Lucifer is not the ruler of hell, just another prisoner? God created hell.

>>12113046
>>12113083

Dialectic, NOT Dual.

>>12110386
Paradise lost.

>>12112971
He did create paradise. Are you not familiar with the original sin?

>>12112971
Because he gave us a gift, that we squander. That gift is freedom.

God is "I am that I am"--the ultimate and original will to being. That which wills itself into being. From that will does all else exist. Everything else, as a direct extension of God's will, is in harmony with God. But, nothing else can even conceive of an alternative to God's will. This means they can know and love God, but any act they take is only an further extension of God's will. All other being, though inherently knowing God, is contained and limited, and has no hand in creation. Man is different. Man has a will of his own. Not only is man given the possibility of knowing a will other than God's, we are allowed to actualize that will. This brings discord to creation. The universe is not at peace. Why is this allowed? Because, if we follow God's will, it will be by choice. This means that although any creation at our hands will be God's will, it will also be our own. We are given the possibility of having a small authorship in Creation. This is the greatest gift. All our pain and suffering has either come at our own hand, or out of our own confusion about what is wrong and right. God weeps for us. God let us kill him so that we might do right. But, at least for a time, he still allows us to err in the hopes that more of us might know the unbearable wonder of his love.

You need to abandon your materialist understanding of life. Life is not some illusion produced by chemical interaction. Rather, life is a blinding ray of being that extends from the origins of all things to now, shone through the prism of time and space. Everything that you see, everything that you touch, has the same origin. That means that it connects, in an unbroken lineage, to God himself. And so do you. An unbroken pattern and desire to exist. Just like a bolt of lightning, or an electric current, but instead of existing in a wire, or in the friction of the air, this pattern of energy, this pattern of love exists and courses through you.

>>12113171
God could have stopped Lucifer with a blink of an eye. The idea of Lucifer starting an insurrection against an all powerful God is ludicrous. Also God created Lucifer with all of his flaws.

>>12110386
Evil is God’s doing as well. Without it, what liberty could we exercise? We are free and remain free. But if God left us without Evil, we would not be free.

>>12110386
what a reasonable homosexual pedophile this guy is

>>12113184
>Life is not some illusion produced by chemical interaction. Rather, life is a blinding ray of being that extends from the origins of all things to now, shone through the prism of time and space
To-may-to, to-mah-to

This thread SUCKS. Theodicy is even worse than Atheism. Please delete.

>>12112971
Imagine an evil child molestor raping an innocent child, and you have a gun to the back of his head. You could end the madness with just a simple trigger pull.

>”nah man doing that would interfere with the child molestor’s free will. Also I created him to have pedophilic urges and weak morals”

The pedophile is a slave to his vice that god burdened him with. Remember the Pharoah of Egypt, how God hardened his heart so that he wouldn’t let the Jews go? How is that offering free will?

Theists will defend this.

>>12113197
Not so. On the one hand, you know that light is a spectrum, that there are kinds of light, kinds of energy you cannot see, but exist and have impact. Yet on the other hand, you do not consider the spectrum of consciousness. You do not consider that, in all its simplicity, and atom still has a will. From a single will to being, a variety is made. The interaction between this variety, all an extension of the original, produce more varieties. With each new variety made, the complications grow exponentially. Across infinite iterations, this becomes a reality that we recognize. But what is a chemical, but a relationship between elements? And what is an element but a relationship between atoms? And what is an element but a relationship between proton, neutron, and electron? And so on and so forth. Each of these a complication and derivative of the will to being. The sequence of time is not a material thing. It is a matter of perception. The reality is the pattern which transcends time and space. What we call material is merely the imprint, the afterglow of real being.

>>12113226
God gave us freedom, who we are is our choice.

>>12113226
You do not understand the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge. The pharaoh reaped what he sowed. Even in the small things are we made and tested. Although there come points of no return, no one is a product of fate.

>>12110396
This is the most Facebook tier woke post I've ever seen. Go fuck yourself, you misinformed piece of shit. I hate Americans as much as the next guy, but you're about as smart as Russel Brand

>how can God be real if sometimes I'm sad

>>12110386
This world deserves all its evil, but none of this evil deserves permanence. Hence hell, the end of all evil and Satan's rule.

>>12113285
>Sends more than half the human population to eternal torment.
>Is fully capable of preventing or changing this.
>Created the system demanding their "punishment" in the first place.
>Blames it on everyone else.

Loving father, or gigantic asshole?

>>12113189
>"I made him just and right, sufficient to have stood though free to fall. Such I created all the etherial powers, both them who stood and them who failed."

>>12113234
>Moses: Let my people go!
>Pharoah: Ok, I get your point. I shall let them go.
>God: Woah, slow down, I haven’t killed enough of you yet. I will force you to continue to oppress and hurt the Jews I’m supposedly protecting despite me proving that doing so will be your doom.

“””Freedom”””

>>12112971

>>12113226
Pharaoh was a dick for too long. There's your answer.

>>12113307
>this is how atheists unironically conceive of God
They're all children, aren't they.

>>12113300
>God is to blame for people choosing sin
>justice is bad
>suffering is bad

>>12113303
>forces people to be evil
>doesn’t force them to be good

So you can have free will, unless you start acting too good?

Question for our christfriends, why did God create the world in the first place?

>>12110878
Being sent to hell if you fuck up seems pretty compelling.

>>12113371
God is beyond spacetime, and experiencing everything simultaneously.
Time doesn't exist without space, there was no 'before' creation. Ask any physicist.

>>12113392
>Christfag knowing anything about science
Lmao

>>12113336

>>12110794
>If god is all-powerful he could literally show up once and prove his existence in the age of cell phone cameras
Read the Gospels. There are people that saw Christ in person, even performing miracles, and still didn't believe he was God.

>>12111060
Go to bed zizek, no one wants to hear about the post-modern theological turn

>>12113226
God didn't will that Pharoah's heart hardened, it hardened on its own by interacting with God.

if there is so much evil in the world to be concerned about why does god make such a fuss whenever I try to jerk it?

>>12113437
There are different kinds and levels of crime. Murder may be worse than stealing, but stealing is still a sin as is masturbation,

>>12113437
He's a manifestation of antiquated societal control mechanisms.

>>12113414
Yes exactly. Those who believe see God in all things. Those who do not believe will never see. And before you say it's just confirmation bias, understand the same process works both ways. The atheist begins with doubt; if he desires reassurance in his previous ideas, he will find it; if he looks for proof against it, he will find it.

>>12113445
the real crime is the fact that God has no respect for privacy like nigga I don't need you sitting on the end of my bed lecturing me about morality while I'm wiping nut off my chest

>>12113414
Why did Jesus demonstrate Miracles if it was all for naught?

>>12113474
You have it backwards. What you don't need is masturbation. It injures you soul and limits your love. You wouldn't cut your wrists, because you believe in your body. But because you cannot see your soul, you punish yourself, even though you continue to feel the pain in almost every part of your life.

>>12113466
>some people are born blind to God and can’t see his presence in all things

Then how the fuck is that atheists’ fault that they don’t believe in him when he created them blind to his existence?

Which is the biblically-approved method, /lit/?

>>12113414
If God is all knowing then shouldn’t he be able to think of a way to prove he exists to all people, even the most staunch atheist denier? Perhaps God isn’t as smart as he thinks?

>>12113489
if i dont masturbate at least everyday my prostate swells up like a red balloon, is this what gods forgiveness feels like?

>>12113466
>Those who do not believe will never see
You overestimate the will of Atheists. In the face of having the laws of physics, their entire notion of reality turned on its head by an unparalleled entity, a more than likely shallow position of atheism would crumble.

>>12113491
>born blind
No one is born blind. People are taught to be blind. And all it takes is to open your eyes. Consider the possibility not as a critic, but as a seeker. You can even keep it in only part of your mind, as a hypothetical. Simply see if it can fit together. And once you see if it can fit together, try and see whether the effect would be good or bad to believe in it. You ask Christians to question their most basic beliefs. If you are so confident, why do you not do likewise?

>>12113503
I have a rubber drain cover that I can pop off at will, so I'd just shit directly down the drain. No need to stomp. It's what Jesus would have wanted.

>>12110386
All of you are pussy faggots. You think you know what suffering is? Humans are full of shit, it could be so much worse. All human issues are basically first world problems compared to what could be.

>>12110514
someone post the pasta

>>12113537
Why is such a big deal made about Jesus dying on the cross? Countless humans were crucified, and there are far worse deaths than that.

>>12113537
Imagine basing your beliefs on such petty reasoning.

>>12113537
>All human issues are basically first world problems compared to what could be.
>what could be
>could
Even admitting that idea of God and the resurrection is only a possibility.

Also, can you really look at a starving child or a brutally tortured man and think, 'nope, first world issue. Learn what suffering is REALLY like, sweaty :)"

>>12113537
humans are full of shit that's why I made this post >>12113503

>>12110386
>Why? Because I'm a sodomite

It's moronic to think of evil and pain as distinct from God. Supposing God is omnipotent and omniscient, nothing created by said God can be assumed to operate as distinct from God. In this instance evil exists because evil is a product of God and even further evil is a part of God. Take your own arm for example while you may never say that your arm itself is you in total, it is a part of you and your omniscience of your arm's actions makes it so that it can not be said to be operating distinct from yourself. Such is the case with everything created by an all powerful and all knowing God. Say that God is either all powerful but not all knowing or all knowing but not all powerful. In this instance evil is the product of agents distinct from God and able to act on their own will. Thus evil is born from either the inability of God to predict the occurance of evil fully, or from the inability of God to give freewill to an agent that is wholly good, or from the desire for God to give freewill to an agent that is not wholly good.

>>12113528
>try and see whether the effect would be good or bad to believe in it
spook

>>12113521
And an alcoholic will vomit and have shaky hands. Your body is used to a level of production that you don't make use of. The reproductive track evolved for procreation. You have found a way to receive temporary pleasure by stimulating that system. But this creates an emotional imbalance. Normally, when the system is activated properly, you will grow in intimacy with another individual. You will feel closer to them than almost anyone else. The sexual experience actually creates a chemical cocktail in your brain that makes you more emotionally open, and makes your ready to map another person's identity onto your own. But instead, you have no one. You experience the emotional turmoil of sex without the biologically expected and stabilizing presence of a long term mate. By deviating from the proper purposes of life, you've built a small prison for yourself in your pursuit of pleasure. You have a physical addiction of loving yourself over other people.

>>12113568
Everyone always asks for an empirical demonstration of God, and yet no one wishes to perform the experiment themselves.

So far, all I've gathered from Christfags is that they are often times too stupid to formulate an argument, and will instead tell you to read the words someone else wrote to defend THEIR faith. And when they do bother explaining themselves, their points are so shallow and overstated they have to dress it up in a needlessly recrementious fashion as to not appear so vacuous.

>>12110386
that dumbass failed the test

>>12113556
What is starving to death compared to eternity in the lake of fire? God in his infinite mercy put a limit to how much someone can suffer on Earth. That suffering is there so that we can have a taste of the slightest sliver of what hell is like.

What is pleasure when there is no suffering?

>>12113626
>needlessly recrementious
Suddenly the vacuum of space seems full in comparison to your mind.

jeez this board is full of retards

>>12113550
I think if you actually read the Gospels you'll find that there was more to it than that (ever heard of Gethsemane?)

>>12113626
>muh thesaurus muhfugga bix nood

>>12113675
yikes

>>12113656
Really? Did I give you the impression I believe in a god or something?

>>12110386
God is not your friend he is your father. You must obey his authority, fear him, submit, and repent for your sins! Fire and brimstone preachers are right.

>>12113772

>>12113083
>I often see them saying evil people were possessed by the devil or that the devil is behind bad things like natural disasters and plagues
I've never heard a christian say this even once.

>>12113799
hmm.

Also, Thomas Aquinas btfo!

>>12113772
>Fire and brimstone preachers are right.
The absolute state of christfags.

>>12113825
Oh shit. Christcucks seriously just destroyed their entire argument on their own.

>>12110770
Babies are NPCs and, as a result, are outside God's grace.

>>12110386
Theists always use one or more of these excuses:

>God has a reason that's beyond mortal comprehension
>It was time for him/her to go. He had finished what God had planned for him/her to do.
>God is punishing them for X.
>God is testing us.

Evil exists for primarily aesthetic reasons. Existence is the greatest piece of art ever created and one of an ultimately tragic nature, due to the innate corruption of mankind which must be punished either through extensions of mankind. Evil is the manifestation of the stagnant, the corrupt, the weak aspects of man and so this cybernetic system destroys it and allows greater creativity to eventually exist. It is a slow process and one which ultimately tramples on individuals but their suffering is beautiful and eventually will lead to a greater beauty and order afterwards.

>>12111268
t.Heretic.

>>12113528
> try and see whether the effect would be good or bad to believe in it
So it's not about how real it is, but about how helpful it can be? I'm sure it's helpful af for the pope

>>12112991
>>12111729
I really hope this is bait

>>12114619
Neither position can be proved to the satisfaction of the other, because each position requires a leap of faith. If you have a better measure for an experiment, put it forward. When I ask you to see if it would be good or bad to believe in it, I do not mean your own personal gain, necessarily. After all, what is helpfulness? Each religion puts forward drastically different ideas of what is good and bad, and so does your philosophy put forward many other ideas of good and bad. Since I take it you believe in evolution, consider it in an evolutionary perspective--does the belief in God increase the chances of the survival of life or decrease it? And before you say that belief in God may have once been useful, but now only causes harm, first consider whether your understanding of harm is evolutionarily correct. I'm not asking you whether belief in God is something that brings you immediate satisfaction, but whether the entire system of morals and metaphysics is more beneficial, including the differing ways that beneficiality is defined. While the evolutionary perspective cannot determine what is true in the most abstract sense, we can infer that something is at least true in as much as it helps the survival of a species, and even potentially life itself. If you say that some of the things that religions put forward is helpful, how do you adequately strip those lessons from the vehicles which propagate them?

So why does the atheist think these things exist?

>>12110386
Why should anyone take fatties seriously?

>>12111264
People have loved dostoyevsky long before that canuck came a long.

>>12111385
Yeah, but just look at the spacing.

>>12111264
>the opposite conclusions
And look where that's got us.

>>12110392
Note sodomy refers to all sexual indulgence outside the context of monogamous marriage, not just butt stuff, so don't think that you're higher in the line-up than the fags.

>>12113033
>birth defects
>cancer
>not attributable to human intervention

Pick two

>>12110404
Why is that funny? Srs

>>12115156
Contrition may be a small thing, but it's a big difference.

>>12115156
I am.
All perversions should be shunned. The only permissible sex act is procreation in a monogamous union, and even that must be moderated.

>>12115160
>genetic birth defects
Or do you expect every person who procreates to be a genealogist?

>>12115160
Oh yeah that kid with Hodgkins, definitely deserved it for being an unhealthy slag.

>>12115250
The first mistake you make is thinking anyone deserves anything. Existence is not a right, especially not in your worldview. In your view, we are not beings which are owed a body. The second mistake you make is thinking that Christians believe the kid has hodgkins because of some fault of his own will. The third mistake you make is thinking that your perspective of pain and suffering is complete and accurate. Whether you accept the Christian perspective or not, you must admit that any perspective of suffering is inherently qualitative, and to a great extent subjective. Building from that, you place pain and suffering as an inherent trait to the physical state, and refuse any other explanation; however, you do not have proof of this. Does this mean the kid does not suffer? Of course not. But it leaves us with the question of how do we best aid those who are suffering. This question is further complicated when you consider that resources are limited, and the apparent causes of suffering are unavoidable, no matter what physical adjustments we make. Even if we can cure the one kid, can we cure all kids? What will this cost us? Is it worth it? How do we measure these costs and benefits? If we can cure all cases of hodgkins, what about all other illness? Can we cure them all? Even if we can, it is doubtful we can cure all of them at the same time? And if we could cure all of them, would that be right? What would be the long term effect of curing all disease? Is life un-fettered an empirically good thing? And if we can cure all diseases, what about all the other causes of suffering? If we can cure all current known suffering, will this prevent all future suffering? If we could cure all current and future suffering, what would be the cost then? You dismiss God and religion because it is convenient. It is easier to deal with the individual case of a kid with hodgkins without God than with God. It may even be easier to deal with hodgkins itself without God. But to eliminate all suffering without God and without Religion? How will that be accomplished? The problem we are grappling with is not simply the suffering of one, but suffering itself.

>>12113537
It couldn't be any worse or any better. We live what is in its totality, and these perspectives that create hypotheticals to make comparisons are fruitless.

>>12115294
Well actually maybe they aren't fruitless but bare poison each and every way.

>>12115294
The fatalist perspective fails at the origins of being. You may say that everything is simply an inevitable effect of other causes. But what was the cause of being itself? How can that be inevitable?

>>12115304
A demiurge is not inevitable?

>>12115332
How did the demiurge come about?

>>12115341
Not sure

>>12111264
like

clockwork

>>12115349
Alright, don't play dumb. If you can see that everything has a cause, how then can the demiurge not have a cause?

>>12115341
Sophia tried to give birth through meditation without the active male principle.

>>12110386
There can't be good things without bad things. It's not like you can just remove everything "bad" from the equation and people will suddenly be happy all the time. We would either end up in a constant emotionally neutral state, or we would just become more sensitive and find new bad things to lament.

>>12115446
Sorry.

>>12110386
>If God is so nice, why doesn't he just make Heaven on Earth >:(

>>12115379
Cause would be something like becoming what is, which never changes. I don't know if a demiurge would have some fixed point of origin then.

>>12110386
I guess he doesn't respect his parents and general authority figures.

>>12112971
Why are you people so stupid? EVE ATE THE FRUIT! IT GAVE US FREE WILL WHICH MADE US MORE LIKE GOD! C'mon man! It's so goddamned basic! God can't fuck with us without our permission because we have FREE WILL.

>>12115446
>There can't be good things without bad things
Is god subject to a line of logic that he did not create?

>>12115464
Why inflict such a scale of suffering that is essentially random, and unaffected by our free will?

>>12111264
Peterson just so happens to be right about Dostoevsky and a few other things and people act like noone is allowed to agree with him

>>12115541
Not sure, but if God were to overrule that line of logic and cast a spell on us to make us all happy, all the time, existence would become meaningless. We would have no incentive to do anything at all because we would be happy no matter what. In fact, he wouldn't even need to cast a spell on us, he could just shoot us all up with heroin and it would cause the same effect. Why would God want to create an existence like that? we need trials to make life meaningful.
>>12115553
I think it's obvious that there needs to be at least some suffering, but yeah, the DEGREE of necessary suffering is up for debate. Perhaps random suffering is necessary for us to truly appreciate life. Or maybe most forms of suffering (like certain diseases) have arisen through millions of years of natural development, and were not directly created by God. Maybe he has principles that prevent him from interfering in such things.

>>12115596
Thats not heroin, thats heaven

>>12113222

You could have deleted it...

>>12110386
The reason why I don't believe in god (in a moral sense) are cases like the murder of Yunko Furuta (tortured and raped for 24 days until her body was mashed to a pulp and died of heart arrest.)

No amount of happiness is enough to justify or undo such cruelty done to innocent people.

>>12110396
The state of the modern middle east is entirely Britain's fault.

>>12110386
The irrational atheists by vox day

>>12115827
Just read the wiki article on this, Jesus Christ

>>12110657
And guess who put the Islamic verse on his flag? That's right, Saddam.

>>12115161
Because >>12110392 thinks Hell is actually real

>>12110772
Is that the reason why there is holy water as opposed to regular water?

>>12111032
I understand your wish to be a meek sheep, a poor ideologue, with little going on in his head. Keep doing that, but don't project it onto atheists!

>>12111120
A holy book, created by the Lord, by God, by the all-powerful, by His grand directive. Yet somehow, Christians have been murdering each other (other Christian sects) for merely disagreeing with each other.
But He does work in mysterious ways, doesn't he? ;)

>there need to be bad things to appreciate good things :)
>Christian theology states that God is literally made out of love and lives in a state of perfect bliss and knowledge of everything

>>12111268
How?

>>12115926
>A holy book, created by the Lord, by God
The Bible was created by Orthodox Christians, you moronic mong.

Only Muslims think their book was created by god, and there's a reason why they all have 80 IQ and wipe their asses with their hands.

>>12115464
Ooh baby do you know whats thats worth?

The only thing that this thread has taught me is that self proclaimed athiests have an understanding of God and religion similar to that of a young teenager's. I assume it's because this is the time they left religion behind, but seem to think that Christians think God is a magic sky man and Jesus was a wizard and mock everyone else accordingly.

I also get the feeling these people only have a bone to pick with Christians and don't seem to be bothered by any other major world religion. Why don't you guys go out and try and spread your atheism to some Muslims? I'm sure some are moving into your neighborhoods as we speak.

>>12110627
If there is such a thing as a God then he would be judged by our standards like everything else in the universe.
Do you see what's wrong with this?

if god is omniscient then he must know before a person is born whether or not they will end up going to heaven or hell
so why doesnt he just not create those who would go to hell? why condemn them to eternal suffering

>>12115506
I came in late to this thread, and usually I wouldn't post in it because there simply isn't enough solid thinking going around. I'm hoping some young lurkers with high IQs will be able to see through the dumbass arguments, of which yours is a shining example.

Here's what's wrong with your post, and every other Augustinian/religious argument in the thread that argues for an omnipotent/omniscient God.

Firstly, we do not have free will. God is omniscient, and thus knew exactly how whatever permutation of the world he would create would play out. He chose our lives for us when he chose to create this particular world over another.

Secondly, any evil or pain that can be found must have expressly been placed there by God because, as an omnipotent being, he must necessarily have been able to create a version of the world without this evil. It makes no sense to say 'ya but u need a bit of pain for the perfect world' because God, by definition, could have done anything, including creating a perfect world without the need for any pain in it.

Intelligent reader, I know you can tell this line of thinking is right, and if you're even smarter, you'll realize where this must lead a religious thinker unwilling to part with God: the options are:
1) God works in mysterious ways (the Fideistic move)
2) God is not omnicient/omnipresent/benevolent

Christianity simply does not stand up to rational scrutiny. It has been a regular party line for some time to claim that both the Atheist and the Christian require 'a leap of faith', but this is a lie of omission, by which both sides are painted with the colors of irrationality and made equal choices. It is clearly the Christian position which cannot be argued for rationally, and this is because it is internally contradictory: a nonsense. A God which literally cannot be logically reconciled with reality must ask reality to bend for Him, but if this is allowed, any of a myriad of divinities could see themselves fit the newly warped holes of our world.

If experience serves me right, some posters will reply to this with their counter-arguments, but there has never, ever been such an argument which wasn't easily defeated. Either because its short and derisive nature made it more of a yelp than a reply, or because it was long and misguided, the product of the sclerotic brain of a christposter, unable to tell that the argument he is weaving from memory is an insufficient rejoinder to this one.


All this vitriolic bravado being said, if someone submits an argument that can actually make me change my mind, I would be enormously thankful, because as it stands I haven't seen the debate move forward from the non-christian rebuttal. Boetius and the ancients have no answer for it, but perhaps someone has a very clever modern take on the whole thing. All I see is fideism, but again, not very satisfying, and not very christian.

>>12113177
All acording to Keikaku, said god as he rubbed his hands while watching Eve stuff the apple down Adams throat.

>>12116421
I can maybe shed some light on this with my personal experience.

Firstly, around the time I became an atheist I was unfamiliar with 4chan. Despite all the shitposting that goes in here, you can get a pretty good level of discourse so long as you avoid >one liners. I had not found Christians who could argue worth a damn on any other forum at that time, as they usually couldn't get beyond the level of "well the Bible says..." for their arguments and never even began to touch on philosophy or metaphysics outside their book. They were all the exact caricature that atheists tend to strawman Christians as.

Christians I've encountered on 4chan have actually given me things to think about, but I can imagine that encountering the "muh Bible says" crowd elsewhere, especially during the time one was getting into atheism, would result in a difficult to shake impression upon teenagers that Christians were just simpletons who believed in fairy tales.

I mean seriously, if you'd seen their argumentation on 4chan you might be inclined to call them out as an atheist false flagging to make Christians look bad. Literally just "the Bible says..." usually followed by assurances that Jesus would forgive us if we repented and the occasional :)

As for the question of Islam, fuck the idiot crowd of atheists who ignore it. How can you rail against the far less aggressive Christianity yet have no criticism for the comparitively savage fundamentalist Islam?

>>12113184
>that we squander.
>That gift is freedom.
Being free to do what you tell me to do is not freedom if i am forced to choose between being a slave or suffering eternally in hell.

>>12110649
The irony here is that if humans were to encounter a sentient cockroach, many would try to talk to it, make life comfortable, ask how it sees the world and generally try to learn from it and live with it. God just makes cosmically insignificant entities able to question god's motives and moral shortcommings specifically to ignore them.

>>12110933
>who have to be told what to do all of the time
Yeah fuck you dad i don't love you either, not like i have ever met you so stop demanding my love.

Anyone else feel that believing in a god who doesn't care about humanity and then "loving" him anyway is kind of like cuckolding?

>>12115156
no, sodomy is butstuff, sex outside marriage is fornication

>>12111192
>Maybe they did it because they could? Maybe people don't need a reason to do evil?
Virtually no evil deed was perpetuated because they just could do it, It always is done with a good goal in mind.
>It's not a pleasant conclusion
It's not a proper conclusion because everything points to the exact opposite.
> Just human nature in its purest form.
>human nature is evil
you sound like some goth kid.

>>12113356
>People are at fault for making choices without having all require information
>We should punish children like adults because they made the choice.

>>12113414
>There are people that saw Christ in person
Christcucks don't understand the difference between random faggot performing miracles and god appearing and doing shit that can't be doubted.
>oh hey look at that warlock there fuck call the guards he deals with demons to infect the souls of those poor invalids.
>and still didn't believe he was God.
Because at no point has he given undeniable proof, you are talking about people who believed in magic why would they believe he was god just because he can do magic?

>>12115107
>Neither position can be proved to the satisfaction of the other,
Yes it can, God can per definition provide proof that is absolutely satisfactory, the opposite of course can never be proven satisfactory because you can not disprove God as per the definition of the concept.

>>12110438
isn't God supposed to love his creation?

>>12113579
>By deviating from the proper purposes of life
In the game of love there are always two players.
you imply a choice was made to not pursue the proper purposes of life but that could only be true in a world where women were mere toys to be taken.

>>12116581
I dont think so, pal.

>>12116581
>The irony here is that if humans were to encounter a sentient cockroach, many would try to talk to it, make life comfortable, ask how it sees the world and generally try to learn from it and live with it.
The first thing humans would do is to brutally experiment on it.

>>12110421
If the maker of the universe is evil should you still respect it? You can't demand respect and that's exactly what the christian god does on punishment of hell.

>his actions as "meaniehead" and "poo poo dummie" is not serious
did you eat a lot of paint chips as a kid?

>>12116421
Firstly I'm sure most people in this thread are young teenagers. If you want to be more serious than go on YouTube and start looking for debates.

> think that Christians think God is a magic sky man and Jesus was a wizard
Well this is very close if not exactly what christians believe depending on how you define the terms.

This is an american board thus not a lot of muslims here. A lot of us can relate and understand the basic concepts of christianity. This is why someone new to /lit/ will come here everyday and post a thread like this.

>Spread your atheism
It's unfortunate that the word atheism even has to exist. The only reason it exists is because it's linguistically useful to segregate belief systems. But "atheism" exists as the default state. Christianity and religion is the thing that got spread.

>>12116525
Interesting if somewhat immature sounding post. I have a few problems with it.

Why does God's foreknowledge mean that there is no free will? As far as I can tell, knowing what a free agent does, whether it's in the past, present or future, does not mean that the act wasn't free. I don't see any contradiction.

You also say that any evil must have been made by god, since it was in his power to accomplish his will by other means. I think there is something deeper at work in Christianity. Originally with the Jews there were laws, and as the apostle points out, when there is only the law we are all sinners. The source of all evil is our sin, which is freely chosen by us. However, god saw this and decided to put his omnipotence to work, such that the creatures who would only sin when left to their own devices could be redeemed despite their sin. So he gave up his son (himself) on the cross and rose again to forgive us. Think about it for a second. He took our free will, which we used to kill the way the truth and the life, and redeemed it by showing that God the word cannot be killed, and he took on the sin (the crucifiction in which everyone participates) and put it to good use, the redemption of all. What he accomplished was to let man freely sin, but in a way that saves and redeems him. God actually took sin and used it for good, and because of that people now freely choose the good.

So, god may have created us and allowed us to create evil, but he used the evil (the we created) for good. As the apostle also says, through Christ we are lovers of the law.

You seem to not like Augustine, but I think this was his whole point. Maybe you should give him another read.

>>12113046
Excuse me sir how does this platonic craftsman who takes from the eternal and fills a receptacle said to have absolutely no characteristics (except for being a receptacle) exist whatsoever? How can a receptacle be other than what-is-not if it must remain formless for the world to manifest? How can nothingness be thought about or interacted with? If the demiurge is temporal like the world of becoming he created, what created the demiurge? If the the demiurge is eternal why would he need to create imperfect temporal becoming from what is divinely perfect being?

>>12116747
All the atheists in this thread are underage teenagers as proven by this post. Thread discarded.

>>12116525
Here's some advice (from an atheist). This goes for anyone though. Don't patronize your opponent. It shows weakness.

Hypothesize that you are a teacher. You have students that aren't going to understand, they might even disagree. But only a fool or someone who is not comfortable with their own beliefs is going to belittle the student. You'll find that the best minds and rhetorical artists very rarely if ever get frustrated and make ad hominen attacks. They are so well versed in their depth of knowledge that they would never stoop to that.

>>12116700
You're using "humans" as if we were a homogenous mass. Of course some would kill it, some would brutally experiment. But you obviously cant deny that some people out there believe in doing good and not harming others. On two seperate occasions ive tried to kill a fly and had different people telling me to let it go. These people are already more moral than any creator *tips fedora*.

>>12111103
To be interpreted, surely?

Is religious strife god's goal?

>>12110386
He's not capricious, mean-minded, or stupid. If anyone insist on arguing using strawmen, there is no point in engaging.

Unironically, the best way to engage this question is by working your way through the Western Canon. Or, if you'd like a brief introduction to Christian thought (or generally traditionalist and spiritual thought), C.S. Lewis's the Abolition of Man or Mere Christianity are good starting points.

>>12110392
You're as bad as any communist

>>12110386
Injustice and pain are necessary for beauty. I am God the artist, and you are welcome to disrespect me, but you will not disrespect my work.

>>12116854
You strike me as someone who's never even heard any decent arguments from the opposing side. I mean you're recommending C.S. Lewis for chrissake.

1. Close 4chan
2. Go to youtube
3. Search for either Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Lawrence Krauss, Alan Watts, Richard Dawkins.
4. Don't open a sound bite, find an entire debate (usually a few hours long) and listen to the whole thing.
5. Repeat
6. Repeat
7. Repeat

These are the top "atheist" debaters going up against the top religious minds. Maybe your mind won't be changed, in fact it probably won't. But it will sharpen your ability to argue your position. No offense (really) but your post seems very naive.

>>12116871
But this is so fucking untrue. Living in a stressful, shitty situation doesn't improve your perception of beauty. If anything it obfuscates it. Why would the world be any different?

>>12116876
That's not what I meant at all.

>>12110675
>trying to force mortal concepts and force an entity that's all powerful to play by your rules
Such is the arrogance of humanity.

>>12110386
Whether there is or isn't a God our current reality would be identical.
Micro managing events implodes within itself, therefor the only possible God would be one that set the universe in motion and that's it.
Take a skatepark as an example, if god wanted to create a skatepark devoid of suffering it would be the most boring place imaginable, without risk, without suffering, dropping into a half pipe would be banal at best.

>>12116644
Jesus was God doing "shit" that can't be doubted

>>12116875
>going against the top religious minds
Most of the people that respond to debate are apologetics like C.S Lewis or modern personalities because the actual intellectuals within Christianity are not trying to convince everyday people of upper crust theological concepts. This is the inherent problem I find with most religious/anti-religious debate, very little of it actually exists. In the public sphere today you don't see philosophers or historians engaging in these debates on the secular side, you get people like Dawkins ( a fucking biologist) Watts (a boomer orientalist) Hitchens (a literary critic) Harris (a neuroscientist) and Krauss (a physicist). The biggest question to raise is what does a educational background in science have to do with historical claims on the validity of Christian history, theological/philosophical claims on the nature of God, or on the ethics of belief and religious culture? They might be able to argue on the actual nature of reality, but that would mostly fall on physicists like Krauss, and the current models of our understanding of physics don't contradict Christian thought. (Not even getting into the massive number of Christians in scientific fields)

On the opposite side, most of the highly educated religious simply work in their respective fields whether they're historical, scientific, etc. without writing apologetics, or they work within their church and the large majority of their debate is with others within their church. This leaves the majority of Christian apologetics as people who may at times check in with a more highly educated religious to fact check something or get more info into a certain concept or position, but otherwise the person writing does not have relevant education to bring something engaging to the table, leading to a similar problem as with the secular. Even the concept of a lay theologian is relatively modern, for most of history theologians earned their education through their church meaning the most educated were most often also the most devout and most often priests or bishops.

Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis tackles just that. He really is a great apologetic. He is also very normie-friendly, so OP will probably get it.

>>12116875
>Don't read CS Lewis
>Go watch some absolute charlatans on YouTube for the TRUTH

Sometimes I think there's no hope for the future.

>>12116670
You don't have to write like a ponce. Your problem is that you conflate love with pleasure. To love someone is not to be pleasured by them, but to care for them. You think of sex as a selfish act, but when sex is put in its proper place, it is a generous act. Your confusion over this is one of the primary causes of your suffering.

Atheists haven't actually sincerely contemplated God, they just instinctively hate love and truth.

>>12113222
>>12115813

Please end it.

>>12117135
There is neither love nor truth in religion

>>12115466
The existence of any spontaneous and arbitrary being negates any fatalistic perspective. If it happened once. Why can it not happen again?

>>12110386
The Bible

>>12110386
Book of Job specifically

>>12116619
You sound like you're in denial. The whole argument of
>Nobody wants to do evil, they all want to be good. Evil is a result of people trying to be good.
isn't really an argument, it's bargaining
>Ok, there might be a little bit of evil sometimes. But that evil is just because people want to do good!
Then you pat yourself on the back for a job well done and say something like
>Ha, looks like literally everything in the world proves that I'm right, while you're wrong, ha! Do I need to provide a single example? Of course not!
It sure takes a lot of mental gymnastics to stay in that bubble.

>>12117266
wow, anon owned that redd*tor epic style!

>>12110396
It doesn't matter what god they believe in, anglo """people""" are just soulless monsters.

>>12117357
>please don't ever post anything remotely related to reddit, even if it's relevant
why?

>>12111192

Not him but Bush is a 100% true believer protestant Christian. Of this, I personally have no doubt. He's just able to square it with having been president/corporate/jew interests because he's also not that bright.

>>12117407
who are you quoting?

>>12110467
Literally kill yourself

>>12117021
>be random carpenter curing blindness, turning water to wine and other shiet
>people call me a fraud
>b...but i am god
People pretend to be able to do all of those things today too and they are not god.
Make thunder struck at his command and have him fly, have him regrow limbs, have him do things that can't be doubted.
Or for that matter just have him beheaded an d quartered in public and get resurrected instantly.

>>12117421
An idiot couldn't win an election. If Bush was the idiot, then someone competent would have to help him and, having put him there, would be in position to make decisions for him. I personally think this is the case with Trump and Pence now.
But then we can ask the same question about that actual decider. What was his motive?

>>12116421
>atheists r really dumb and liek teenagers
woah great post

>>12117266
>hitler wanted germany to prosper
>stalin wanted a communist utopia
>muslims kill faggots and infidels to save their souls, and by gods command
At no point have i implied that there is no evil, just that the reason for it is not evil

>>12116747
cringe

>>12116700
no, that's Moloch, not humans

>>12117266
>>12117537
add to that
the cambodian genocide was done for the sake of a communist utopia
The soviet famines for that same reason
the circassian genocide for the sake of lebensraum
i mean yes yes you want to see humanity as inherently evil, but fact is nearly everything starts with good intentions.
And considering your inability to read i would like to add that "nearly everything" does not mean "everything"

>>12117537
Saying that's what they wanted doesn't mean they really wanted it. The alternative is that they simply lied, because they enjoyed being rich and powerful.
Stalin knew about people trying to flee his utopia, that his people were starving and that everything he promised was better delivered by the capitalist West. He could have reformed and stepped down easily, but he didn't do that.

>>12117573
>evil is part of human nature = humans are evil
>I'm the one who can't read

>>12110386
The problem with this question is that you try to impose your own human morality, but the God you are questioning is from a religion whose own literature says even your highest "morality" is tainted with evil. So you can you pretend to understand morality when everything you do has some kind of self-serving motive, either directly or indirectly?

>>12117448
some idiot who resorts to memes whenever he's struggling make a reasonable argument, which is all of the time

>>12117500
Bringing multiple back from death including himself seems fairly irrefutable

>>12117617
At least im not having a mental breakdown over how some asshole on redd*t spends his Saturday morning.

>>12117635
That's because you're having a mental breakdown about the mere existence of that website. Then you project that to anyone who dares post an image that happens to mention it.

>>12117654
no im not, just calling out a cringe when i see it

>Stalin knew about people trying to flee his utopia
ie people who sabotage the objective good of the utopia.
>He could have reformed and stepped down easily, but he didn't do that.
Absolutely, but he was too far gone and to acknowledge that you uselessly killed a giant amount of people is rather damaging to your psyche, so he just ends up doubling down in hopes of somehow making his utopia real.
If he actually enjoyed being rich and powerful he would have led the country into capitalism, He would have been rich powerful and beloved.
>Saying that's what they wanted doesn't mean they really wanted it.
I guess that's true, we can not possibly read the mind of a dead guy.
But why would he have lied? his actions were abhorrent no matter the reason he did it so it can't be to absolve himself from the guilt.
At the end of the day you pretend to know human nature, which you can't possibly know, why would you have such an uncharitable view of humanity? are you perchance evil and just projecting after all if everyone is evil by nature then you are just the same.

>>12117594
evil is not part of human nature though, it just so happens that people with good intentions do evil things.

>>12113356
>Creates humans from the bottom up:
>programs them,
>builds every part of them.
>Can see the future, and knows exactly where they'll end up by virtue of knowing literally everything.
>Gets mad when they turn out "imperfect."

>>12117628
>not in public
Yeah he got resurrected and dissapeared from a cave, and appears to those who end up believing in him.
So i was right?
I mean i am not all knowing please show me the parts in which after his resurrection someone he meets who knows of his death who does not believe in his divinity?
And i assume you mean the resurrected saints?
Where does it say that people didn't believe after seeing them?

>>12117719
He resurrected someone in front of a crowd the issue with you is that you're completely ignorant

>>12117808
Did the crowd not believe it?
>the issue with you is that you're completely ignorant
I admit i don't know everything, so please provide me with the passage where the people call bullshit on that resurrection, and how is what i wrote wrong?
Did people not believe? so please tell me where it says that, because i have no recollection of such a passage.
I think the issue with you is that you don't have any proof for your statements because what i said was literally the case.
Jesus resurrected and people believed.

Sorry folks, but Christianity was a mushroom cult

>>12117832
>I admit i don't know everything
You don't know anything because you've quite clearly never even so much as read half of one gospel

>>12117860
The tell me what to read, Where do people not believe the literal zombies walking around?
You repeat yourself like a broken record.

>>12117874
If you want to know about Jesus then read the gospels and don't comment on things you don't have knowledge of

>>12117881
I know about Jesus perfectly well i want you to show me where people didn't believe in the miracle of resurrection.

>>12116747
>default state
nigga wut? You saying the cave men or primitive peoples of the world didn't look up the sky and pray to/ believe in something larger than themselves? All belief systems in the world are derived from older belief systems and so on back to the beginning. Find me a sourced example of any people in history besides "modern atheists" who didn't have a spiritual belief system. And by modern I mean since the Industrial Revolution.

>>12117534
More immature than "dumb," which your post illustrates well, thanks.

>>12117874
Well for one, a zombie, as you seem to mean it, is a very particular view of reanimated corpses as popularized by George Romero, and inspired loosely on folk stories from Haitian Voodoo. What makes it particularly compelling to today's audience is the combinations of a bio-chemical view of bodily death, lovecraftian horror of the mythological being realized in apparent accord with popular understandings of science, and an evocative symbol for current socio-political commentary. So in the most literal sense, the Bible cannot, for very simple reasons, ever be viewed as having "literal zombies." To be slightly more forgiving, the stories in the bible of people being resurrected still differs significantly from your pejorative description. And while it's certainly a phenomenon that's impossible to explain with current science, there is little description given in the stories to understand how the phenomenon worked on a mechanical level. Beyond that, the nature of life itself is as of yet unknown. So, while it seems impossible to us now, it is also impossible to say whether or not it is false, or simply beyond our current understanding.

>>12117889
The conversation is about people not believing that Jesus is the son of God because he performed miracles
The Pharisees didn't believe that Jesus was the son of God when he resurrected Lazarus and wanted to put him to death

>>12117948
I have read up on that and as far as i can tell, everyone believed it even those who wanted to kill him, and they wanted to kill him specifically because they saw that his miracles were turning people towards him.

>>12117998
Did you just ignore the part where I said
>The conversation is about people not believing that Jesus is the son of God because he performed miracles

>>12118027
no i just don't see that in the passage.

>>12118031
Why would the Pharisees be concerned about people turning towards him if they believed he was the son of God?

>>12118038
Because the Romans would fuck the whole nation over.

>>12118045
He's the son of God

>>12118047
And ?
Why would such a thing prevent the destruction of the nation?
Besides them fearing the loss of position, i doubt they believed god would defend the nation from the Romans.

>>12118073
If you were just seeking attention there's a plethora of alternatives available

>>12118087
I am trying to have a honest conversation, but all i get is people being haughty.
The passage literally implies that they believed everything after the resurrection and even before it,
But people tell me they didn't so i want to learn where they get that from since the bible clearly does not make such statement.
as a btw
how would you interpret 52 if not that they believed in at the very least his divinity.

>>12118102
anon thinks I'm a hottie!!!

>>12118102
They didn't believe he was God. They didn't believe he was a prophet. For a time, they thought he was just a man saying provocative things. Then they thought he was a charlatan. Then they thought hew was an agent of evil. And finally they allowed that maybe he was genuinely doing good things. But for the whole time they knew the people would believe, and this is what they were worried about. They did not believe he was the messiah, and they did not believe he would liberate them. His ideas did not fit with what they believed needed to happen to be free of Roman rule. But they felt quite certain that he might raise a mob of people against Rome, enough that Rome would retaliate, strip the pharisees of what little power they had left, and grind the nation into the dust. It's worth noting too that in this passage, the ones saying that Jesus did many miracles were not the pharisees, but common Jews who were telling this to the pharisees. The reaction of the pharisees was to conspire to get Jesus put to death. This leads into the stories around Jesus being put to death. Jesus was a nuissance to the pharisees, he challenged the people, and these things irritated Rome. So, when the Romans seize Jesus, Pilate finds him guilty of no Roman crime. However, the Pharisees were not without power or influence. They told Pilate he had broken Jewish law. The Jews, however had limited authority to carry out their own law. (It's worth noting, however, that they still stoned people without Roman oversight in the smaller towns.) So, not understanding what Jesus has done wrong, and knowing that many people like Jesus, Pilate leaves it to the crowd. At the provoking of the Pharisees, the crowd chooses to free Barbaras, condemnign Jesus to death. In this way, each party tried to pass blame to each other. Pilate washed his hands, because it was not his law, and it was not his decision. The Pharisees thought they were blameless because they did not do the deed, and they did not decide. The people did not think it was their fault, because they did not do the did, nor did they try him, nor did they imprison him. All they chose was to free barbaras. This of course is an incredible Irony. Barbaras was a notorious agitator. Today, we might call him a terrorist. He was a brutal man who was put to death for violence against Rome. The people were looking to the free the yoke of Roman rule, so the Pharisees rallied them to Barbaras, who had a more direct, violent resistance to Rome, (which contradicts the Pharisees stated purposes for killing Jesus.) Meanwhile, Pilate had no desire to free Barbaras. Jesus had broken no Roman law, whereas Barbaras was an enemy to Rome. Many people did not think Jesus was the messiah, even though they were quite afraid that he might be.

>>12118329
woah, dude, what's with all the text?

>>12118338
I want you to read it. That's what's with it.

>>12118350
>reading
yikes!

>>12118388
>I am trying to have an honest conversation
It would appear not.

>>12118405
dude, it's all fary tales and make believe

>>12118422
You're on a literature board. You really think that's much of an insult?

Friendly reminder that the Jews worship Yahweh, who is some sort of negative-entity which established a pact with Abraham, wherein he'd be given worldly gain in exchange for his servitude. This is most certainly not the Creator of this world, who obviously did not, some couple thousands of years ago, choose to approach a single, tiny group of peoples in the Middle Eastern region of the world, and decide to "ally" with them against the other peoples of the world - since ALL peoples of the Earth and the rest of the Universe would be equally His Children. Look into Sumerian tablets, and you'll see plenty of correspondence between their own stories of Anu, Enlil, Enki, etc and those of the Old Testament. Genesis 2:14 literally states the Tigris and Euphrates rivers to be located beside the Garden of Eden. For some reason the Garden was taken to be some otherworldly place existing in Heaven, and yet, Earthly locations were mentioned in Genesis itself. These rivers are found in Mesopotamia, all of whose cultures have a pantheon of deities under the names "Annunaki", "Elohim", etc, but these are one and the same. A group of either extraterrestrial or higher-dimensional (or both) beings who possibly created the human race or had some hand in it, but with certainty have interfered in humanity's affairs, mainly those from the Ancient Near Eastern cultures.

The story of Christ is a familiar one to a Hindu - the concept of God incarnating into Human form, for the completion of some mission on Earth. Thousands of years prior to Christ's birth, we have the equivalent figures of Krishna and Rama recorded of. I am not tied to any specific "religion", which I do not believe in the concept of, but I believe firmly that Christ was the most recent Avatar of Lord Vishnu, who is the same as the Heavenly Father which Christ said He was representing and also in union with - the Male Being who overlooks and sustains the Universe. It saddens me that Christianity became it's own "religion", preaching an "exclusive truth", when Hinduism could have so simply absorbed it into their own tradition, having already long understood the concept of "God incarnating into Human form on Earth", which is the exact story of Christ. 2000 years ago, the fabric of all reality didn't fundamentally change - Christ was simply the latest version in a succession-line of many others prior to Him. I believe Vishnu/Father birthed Himself as an Israelite, which worshipped the Cult of Saturn (the "god" of the Old Testament, which Abraham and Moses followed, who elected the Jews to be his people and in exchange for their obedience to his agenda would look out for them and grant them power) in order to undo their cult from inside it, leading these people away from the cult they did not know they were members of. I believe that Rama, Krishna, Buddha, Yeshua are all real figures and all of them were the Avatars of Lord Vishnu/God the Father. The "Father" spoken of by Christ is NOT the "god" of the OT.

>>12118685
im not fucking gonna read all that man...

>>12118685
Nothing is dumber than this esoteric bullshit.

>>12118685
Same poster here. Christ never once spoke of Adam and Eve, or the Garden of Eden, or of Original Sin. These concepts became connected to Christ through Paul, Christianity's biggest cheerleader, who never the less had no authority to interpret Jesus and His significance, but did so anyway and created the most universal narrative since attached to Christ - of Original Sin - which, once again, Jesus never once spoke of Himself.

The Father/Vishnu, the True God, incarnated Himself as a Jew, in order to subvert their cult from within it, leading them from their commandments and their cultures. Eventually, they sacrificed Him on the cross as an offering to Yahweh.

One knows the represented by their representative - if we examine the figure of Christ, of His teachings and deeds, we see absolutely nothing in common between them and those of the Old Testament, whose "god" is genocidal, nationalistic (literally fights for the Jewish people only, even though he should obviously be the creator of ALL peoples, should he not? Not just one tiny tribe of the Middle East. Literal nonsense.), misogynistic, and war-loving. Considering that Christ clearly strayed the Jews away from their commandments, which were told to them as "unalterable", I can conclude Him to not be a representative of the same deity.

Christ is the incarnation of the True God, who loves all people equally, does not ask for humans to be sacrificed to him as "tests" (a la Abraham, the founding cult father of Yahweh's Tribe), the one who has no religion but might be represented in many religions, and the one who will be incarnating as Kalki at some point in our future to end this Kali Yuga, and establish the Kingdom of Heaven here on Earth.

I will end add one final post to this.

>>12118730
In Hinduism and many other cultures, there is the conception of the Yugas, or Ages. A 4-period cycle from righteousness to depravity - of which we are presently in the last and most depraved of ages, the Kali Yuga. In this age, righteousness will be at it's lowest, and that it will end by Vishnu incarnating as Kalki, who will come and eradicate all evil from Earth. Kalki is said and shown to ride a white horse, and carry a sword. Here are prophecies to note:

Revelations 19:11
I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself.

Revelations 19:15
Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. 'He will rule them with an iron scepter.' He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

Srimad Bhagavatam 12.2.19-20
Lord Kalki, the Lord of the universe, will mount His swift white horse Devadatta and, sword in hand, travel over the earth exhibiting His eight mystic opulences and eight special qualities of Godhead. Displaying His unequaled effulgence and riding with great speed, He will kill by the millions those thieves who have dared dress as kings.

Matthew 25:31
When the Son of Man shall come in His glory and all the holy angels with Him, then shall He sit upon the throne of His glory.

Daniel 7:14
And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed."

Not to mention, in the Kali Yuga it is said that a "demon named Kali will rule the Earth", who I believe to be Satan. Also, it says Kali will have two demon generals, named Koka and Vikoka, which I consider identical to the "Gog and Magog" in Judaism/Christianity or "Yajooj and Majooj" in Islam.

There can be no doubt these are all speaking of a single reality. I would write of more, but simply encourage you to look into these pieces of information yourself. I am not fabricating any of this.

>>12118712
>>12118720
Typical representatives of /lit/. One doesn't read, the other doesn't listen. Good, ignore me. I have given information, which you can listen to if you wish, and research yourself - but if you instead wish to reject it without researching it, or to simply ignore it entirely like the first poster, then be my guest.

>>12118762
>>12118730
>>12118685
Interesting stuff, thanks for posting

>>12110624
>be God
>be all-knowing
>let Satan trick Eve into eating fruit from a tree you told them not to
>punish humans to be eternally guilty of sin despite knowing Satan tricked them

>>12118818
No problem. One last thing for me to tell you and anyone else reading these posts is that in the term "Avatar" means "descent" in Sanskrit. It's a term given to describe the literal descent of Lord Vishnu into the form of a Human, for the accomplishment of some mission on Earth. IF you look into these concepts, you'll see a system of 10 Avatars or the "Dashavataram". I want you to know this cycle is merely metaphor - there aren't literally "10", no more and no less, but rather the "10" are used to showcase a cycle, an evolutionary progression, which culminates in Kalki. I tell you this so that you do not look at the fact that it is said Vishnu has 10 Avatars, and that Jesus is not shown to be any of these. The use of "10" is for illustration of a cycle, and in reality I believe roughly 22 or so have been mentioned in Hindu Scriptures. We must remember that the fabric of reality did not fundamentally change 2000 years ago when Jesus was born. Christ may have used terms like Son, Father, and Holy Spirit, yet these cannot have come into existence when He did, but if they are to exist, they must have ALWAYS existed. And if they have always existed, why not see whether they ,and the entire narrative surrounding Christ, have comparables in other cultures existing prior to Christ? And upon a quick search, one finds the same tale within India, that of a Male Supreme Being descending into flesh, in order to assist Humanity in some regard. Thus, I consider the term "Son" to be correspondent to "avatar", the term "Father" to be that of Vishnu, and the "Holy Spirit" to be that of Parabrahman. These are my views. It is sad to see people so attached to outward labels and appearances, calling themselves not even simply Christians but that of Catholics, Protestants, and a thousand other divisions, rather than to simply be a soul who looks at all the information in front of them and tries to understand it according to a single narrative. Most Christians would condemn me for my equation of Christ to being an Avatar and to have had predecessors the form of Krishna, Rama, etc. They'd prefer to think that the whole of reality changed a mere 2000 years ago, ignoring the existence of other cultures but those of the Middle East, who tell of tales very much like Christ's. As if to say that any peoples or cultures outside those of Semitic nature are heretical, demonic, or better yet, simply do not exist, and have never existed at all. But I seek to look past labels, and I believe firmly that Jesus was one in a line of many, and believe the modern concept of "religion", wherein distinct groups of people function primarily as political units, is complete nonsense, and the opposite of what God wanted. Anyways I wish you well my friend. Take care.