/lit/ - Literature

Might as well ask God to have created a different world. He surely could, but that would be no help to creatures in this world would it. The real issue for creatures like us who cry out for God's love is not the general level of suffering in the world, but how to produce good, even the infinite good, out of it. And it is primarily to that issue that God has spoken, to that end that he has sent his son to reconcile erring finite humanity to himself.

>>12593081
god is arguably the best thing possible, arguably by definition, and if the best thing possible deems it to be best to not help someone, then that is the best thing possible in that scenario

>>12593081

give a man a fish and you've fed him for a day.... teach a man to fish and he will fish for the rest of his life

>>12593132
>>12593143
fpbp

Seriously, Catholic /lit/ is impressing me lately.

>>12593143
>lmao! dude, like, it was totally the best thing for that six year old girl to get molested and murdered!
>your little mind is just too feeble to understand

>>12593161
>his path was blocked by the problem of evil, and he really couldn't continue past his mortal perspective
Pic. It's you.

>>12593161
this is literally 15 year old atheist tier argumentation jesus christ

>>12593203
>>12593225
Nice arguments you've got there

>>12593081
i like dostevsky's point that if there was no suffering we'd just eat cake and fuck all day. there is some nobility in our suffering that disciplines us

>>12593294
and yours is any better?

>>12593294
Boohoohoo evil things happen in the world. Every religion justifies evil and thousands of years of theologians have discussed the issue in more dealth than I can possibly comprehend but my shit argument explains away god. Any argument otherwise is just "muh justification" so I'm right. Hurrdurrdurr I'm a hulking retard atheist who can't handle that I don't have a concrete grasp on everything in existence ever. Fuck off retard

>>12593132
What an elegant way to say absolutely nothing that makes one scintilla of sense.

>>12593143
Why does the being that happens to apprehend our reality have to be the ultimate divine principle? Imagine if we created some simulacrum of a universe populated by conscious life. These beings would probably think that whoever was maintaining this universe was the ultimate divine principle as well. In fact its highly unlikely we have a direct line top the very top of the pyramid.

>>12593081
The clay is questioning the potter, I see.

Do you think God is just completely satisfied and fully God without creation? He’s not some fully sentient being without the mediation and development required to display his qualities. What is omnipotence if God doesn’t even create? How can He be omniscient when there is no creation to be perceive? Do you just think God is immediately “born” with certain predispositions and desires concerning suffering and pleasure? Why would that be the case? Why should God desire that all humans be happy, or that they should all suffer? Does it not make more sense that he should desire all things, so that the truths of existence may be displayed, so that God may know Himself?

>>12593081
And it is because you don't know the end and purpose of things that you think the wicked and the criminal have power and happiness.

Idk friend, we have a personal relationship with God first of all, the purpose isn't some kind of ideal utalitarian world, but the kingdom of heaven that is within you. Just my opinion ;)))

>>12593081
Everyone in this thread has written a story where evil exists and people suffer.
Imagine your own characters criticizing you for how you write the story. They could pray "Dear Author, please make my suffering go away."
You sympathize with their criticisms, and you also care for them, but that doesn't mean you write a different story.

>>12593725
>>12593781
/thread

>>12593643
appeal to authority. Impressive.

>>12593081
Saying "waah bad things happen" is not an argument against the existence of God. To argue against the existence of God you have to demolish the three proofs that give his idea foundation, like Kant did. If reading the first Critique were a graduation requirement we wouldn't be having fucking retarded threads made by indolent children despoiling this board on a daily basis.

>>12593725
If the clay is sentient then it has every right to question the Potter. Not to mention that it is a flawed potter who makes shitty vessels that are only good to be thrown out. Good god (or rather not) the parables in the bible are dumb.

>>12593816
I didn't say God doesn't exist. I just think he's probably an asshole and there is no reason to think otherwise, least of all his emotionally manipulative "sacrifice"

>>12593826
Oh, boy, it's actually a teenager. Give it five years, you'll be thumbposting "a lot of learning leads back to God" in every theology thread

>>12593081
One of the central aspects of imago dei is that God made humanity as representatives of his divine authority on earth. Humans are given authority of the world (fill the earth and subdue the earth), and if this authority is to be meaningful then human actions must not be coerced y God. Evil is a unavoidable consequence of the uncoerced action of Adam eating the fruit, so to mitigate that consequence is to make the authority (imago dei) meaningless.

>>12593822
Not an argument. If you had no hostility and anger, your post would have even less substance. At this point, it just seems like you’re trying to get responses, or you just irrationally hate God. Either way, you’re not persuading anyone.

This is foolish. You expect to know joy without pain? Has it not been written by Solomon himself, it is sweeter to have death than birth, but sweeter than both is to never have been born at all? You act as if your physical flesh holds purpose. Wickedness is abundant, if God were to eliminate sorrow he would simultaneously eliminate joy. You see skin-deep; perhaps you shall read Ecclesiastes?

>>12593846
>Not an argument

Ironically this is my favorite non-argument.

God loves us so much we will go to hell for not having faith in his existence. Have faith why? There is no why; this is faith. I'm an asshole but I wouldn't send my worst enemy to eternal damnation. The good of the New testament is false.

>>12593843
>You don't like a guy who has a disproportionate amount of power the ability and the expressed interest to torture you for eternity?
>What are you, an adolescent?

hmmm

>>12593857
You think man is just? You dare not even to question the superiority of your own shibboleths?

>>12593725
>Do you think God is just completely satisfied and fully God without creation?

Yes and so should you if you care about being orthodox

>>12593861
>expressed interest in torturing you for eternity

I am tired of people not reading the Bible and think they have a say in it because they are indoctrinated by the mathematical mind and media.

>>12593781
If they could do that I would feel tremendous guilt. I think what makes it okay to have bad things happen to fictional characters is that they are, well, fictional. But, hey, that's just me, a guy who doesn't think some book written by bronze age sandniggers isn't the most prfound work of literature ever conceived.

>>12593857
>says the imperfect sinner

>>12593875
Oh right "he isn't willing that any should perish but all should come to repentance". Well since he said that in his own book I'm sure its true.

>>12593699
Bad analogy. We do not create the necessary categories that make up those components of that second simulated reality so we are not analogous to God and cannot be. It’s as if you believe mankind’s ability to create mice in pitri dish and then to place them in a maze that serves for all purposes as ‘their world’ makes us God. It is less sophisticated than your simulated universe but it is the same principle, using what God has provided to create a closed system. Those mice would be just as close to God as the mice in our world.

>>12593880
oh fuck, I'm sure these monkeys will jump on that double negative like it was more than just a typo.

>>12593887
I’d say that’s right. Are you trying to prove yourself wrong or do you not understand the passage? Kek

>>12593889
There is the platonic concept of God and then there is God a being that controls this plane of existence. I still don't see why they necessarily coincide.

>>12593866
Then there is no need for creation

>>12593904
bingo

>>12593725
No one has sufficiently responded to this. There’s literally no reason to think God would favor our pleasure over our suffering. God don’t evolve from monkeys.

>>12593725
Because he is:

>Omnipotent
>Benevolent

ipso facto he can, and want, to design a reality without evil.
If he can not or do not want to, he is not both omnipotent and benevolent.

>>12593781
If the characters in my stories could feel, then I would write the stories in a manner appeasing to them. One of the worst analogies I’ve ever heard dude.

>>12593903
Why not

>>12593894
No I'm simply saying I don't care about the empty words of some cosmic horror.

>>12593912
Why? For the sake of simplicity?

>>12593904
Yes that is correct

>>12593915
So you don’t care about God, yet discuss what he will and will not do, and when presented with his own words denying that you brush it off? Sounds like you are in feverish and afraid denial...

>>12593807
Not really. There's already discussion on this out there and OP had chosen not to read any of it to make a bad argument. Nice try at being blue at though. You'll get it right someday.

>>12593909
So then your admitting that he's a sadistic asshole? Okay, interesting gambit, I suppose.

>>12593910
>the creator of the universe is automatically predisposed to being “omnibenevolent” to all his sentient creations
Literally no reason to think this. God made the world for Him. Our joys, and suffering, just contribute to God’s purpose. Nowhere in the Bible does it say God is omnibenevolent to humans.

>>12593927
I don't care about the empty words of some cosmic horror. Just like I said previously.

>>12593935
Backpedaling as well? You are quite confused.

>>12593866
>>12593822
>>12593725

>thinking that creation is real and that there is ultimately any difference between 'God' and the 'clay'
>not realizing that evil and creation are equally unreal and are only part of the vast kaleidoscopic illusion seeming to play out but not really in God's mind, while God is actually perfect, unchanging and the only thing that actually exists

that's gunna be a yikes from me dawg

>>12593932
So I take it, accepting this reality you have decided to become an antinatalist, right?

>>12593938
No, I'm maintaining, in no ambiguous terms, my position that I am not convinced one way or another by the empty words of some cosmic horror.

>>12593930
You would just as easily argue against God if he created no suffering
>“What GOD would create a world just for puny humans? Is God even omnipotent? Why doesn’t he create evil too? Why does God think like us? He’s probably an alien rather than some transcendent being responsible for ALL of creation. “

All you have are insults and mockery. You’re embarrassing yourself.

>>12593957
No I wouldn't. I guess when you have the mind of an archaic sandnigger, you naturally adopt the rhetorical style of one as well.

>>12593203
>>12593225
Why don't either of you try to make an argument in favor of why horrific scenes of absolute depravity, evil, and manifest chaos are somehow part of God's plan, and then try to explain why we should still worship him knowing that at best he is impotent to affect change in any meaningful way and at worst is the willful author of not only the wanton destruction, but also our perception of this destruction as horrific, evil, and unfair - i.e. all the suffering that the priests say we can let go of if we just trust that every arbitrary and gruesome death is part of some greater cosmic significance is actually only suffered because God engineered us to be that way.
>I am assuming intent. If we're just talking about God as the natural order of the universe, fundamentally lacking what we would recognize as "intent," then it's obvious that we ought to revolt against him, because he can't give us anything but chaos.

>>12593725
If you're ascribing a capacity to create, you're also ascribing a capacity to destroy, i.e. God is both absolutely good and absolutely evil.

>>12593946
No, it’s not as if everyone suffers. The purpose of Christ was to make righteous believers who won’t suffer. I choose to be the ones who actually accept God, rather than hating Him. If you think God is evil to non-believers, why would you take pride in being a non-believer? You’re imposing suffering on yourself!

>>12593968
>If you're ascribing a capacity to create, you're also ascribing a capacity to destroy, i.e. God is both absolutely good and absolutely evil.
What do you mean, destroy?

>>12593081
Why is it better not to suffer than to suffer?

>>12593932
Why would you obey a God who is apathetic to your existence at best and inimical to it at worst?

>>12593969
Oh, you think you're not going to hell? Why, because of some vain profession? That's cute.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx-4ey6P3Oo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0fzPx_3hEY

>>12593875
I've read the Bible front to back you eternal faggot. The severe irony is that you are indoctrinated while I think freely

>>12593987
I’m a Christian. I don’t know what you’re talking about.

>>12593864
I don't think man is just.

>>12593861
you're retarded. I hate idiots that say
>reeeee sure maybe God exists but he's evil!!
It's one thing if you're going to say this means God doesn't exist. To acknowledge God and then call him evil is fucking retarded by any definition since you're basically asking for him to rape you in the ass

>>12593998
Then why do you think and talk like every other /r/atheist I’ve ever seen?

Quick question that doesn't deserve it's own thread:
What is considered the definitive version of the bible to read? Reading it and other religious texts as context for other works rather than as a spiritual guide if that helps

>>12594007
So then why question another, greater being’s?

>>12594019
I was a Christian for most of my life. I'm not an athiest I just don't believe the Christian god is the real god.

>>12594021
KJV is the one that all the other authors have read and hence the one they will refer to most. It's also (arguably) the most well-written.

>>12593969
>You’re imposing suffering on yourself!
You don't understand the argument. God creates the conditions that allow people to suffer, hence he is not essentially worth worshiping.

>>12593981
Just the antithesis of creation. They're complements - no (biological) life without death. No creation without destruction (i.e. you can't make something from nothing).

>>12593983
Turn the question on it's head and the answer is the same - sentiment. People would rather not suffer. Calvinism basically just bypasses the issue by saying "If you complain about the ride, you go to hell, only people who respond to life well matter, even though God is supposed to love you."

>>12594012
>saying god is evil is retarded
>why?
>because he's actually really fucking eviul dude, like you don't want to know

Afraid that's gonna be another hmmm from me.

Also you're probably right that if I had any path to salvation at this point that I would be going along with the production of "Its a Good Life" with the rest of you stupid abrahamic fuckers. I used to be a much better Christian than you ever were! You know why? Because the devil was UP MY ASS! God allowed it, because that's what he does to his faithful. Demons tricked me, shipwrecked my faith and I have no path to salvation, so now I might as well encourage antinatalism and dystheism. I used to be just like those guys I linked videos to. I wouldn't even salt my food anymore. I was serious about following Jesus and after years of that I'm no better off than a lukewarm dimwit like you.

>>12593969
That still doesn't explain why you're not an antinatalist. Surely you recognize that giving birth to people puts them in danger of hellfire.

>>12594006
>Playing dumb because you know I'm right
Autism, everybody.

>>12594054
Based punished gnostic poster

>>12594068
>giving birth to people puts people in danger of hellfire
yes, and this is a good thing. It’s a good thing for evil people to suffer hellfire

>>12594083
So now not only is your God a sadistic asshole, you are choosing to be one as well. I have to say this is the easiest argument on the internet I have ever won.

>>12593983
I dont know faggot. Why are you sitting in a comfortable chair posting and not pouring acid on your nutsack right now?

>>12594044
Thanks, is the NKJV radically different or will that work? I'm guessing it's just updates to old English but if it changes the meaning in any place I'll try to find the original KJV

>>12594041
Do you question allah or the Hindu Gods or any other Gods for that matter?

>>12594083
Why is that?

>>12594083
Its good for evil to exist? How can this be? You believe its good that Lucifer exists?

>>12594089
If you don’t think it’s a good and just thing for bad people to be punished then idk what to tell you anon. If the idea of hell, whether or not you believe in it, doesn’t satisfy some deep- seated instinct for justice in you, then you’re something less than a human being. It wasn’t until the 20th century that effeminate manlets who can’t habdle the idea of anyone suffering decided that the idea of hell disproves any just God who might be associated with it.

Most Christian's are a result of geographical a nd hereditary lottery. Had you fuckers been born in the middle East there is a good chance you'd be arguing on the behalf of allah now using much the same logic

>>12594115
Given that evil is inevitable, it’s good that that evil be punished.

>>12594122
So you should create evil people for God to punish. I had no idea Christians were so... Lovecraftian.

>>12594121
Yeah and if you were born seven hundred years ago in France you’d be arguing that the sun revolves around the earth. The only reason you know bacteria exist is because you’re living in twenty eighteen.
The fact that one’s beliefs are influenced by the accident of his birth doesn’t mean that his beliefs are wrong.

>>12594118
>reals are better than feels
>until they're not

okay then.

>>12594127
what the hell are you talking about? No one can create an evil person. No one has that much influence on his children

>>12594132
>accident of his birth

What a serendipitous Freudian slip.

>>12594136
You're a Christian and you don't know about the fall of man or original sin? Read the book, you fucking ape!

>>12594133
they’re clearly not for you since you have some childish aversion to the idea of people suffering for their crimes.

>>12594138
Why do you think that wasn’t exactly what I meant to say?

Still, no atheist has given a good reason as to why God should create a world without suffering.

>>12594118
>then you’re something less than a human being
I thought humans were unjust?

>It wasn’t until the 20th century that effeminate manlets who can’t habdle the idea of anyone suffering decided that the idea of hell disproves any just God who might be associated with it.
Yeah, nah. Aristocratic / warrior ("manly") arms of society generally perverted Christianity to justify whatever they did (more in line with Indoeuropean than Semitic), same as Caesarians who use your faggot inclination towards resentment to prop up their regimes by popular consent (e.g. degenerate democracies).

>>12594142
Only Calvinists believe that people are born inherently evil as a result of original sin.

>>12594143
You have a childish attachment to the idea that this kind of conduct is going to save you from that very same fate and get you the prize of eternal life. But do you think God cares about how many internet points you rack up in defense of him? No, you must be fulyl submitted to Jesus. You must pick up your cross DAILY. Overcome the flesh. Resist the temptations and tricks of the devil and his demons. You must THANK God for how he afflicts you. And only then are you on the narrow way.

Now how do you feel about your salvation, you sanctimonious little prick?

>>12594154
That was Anselm's doctrine first, you stupid retard.

>>12594149
Because you think that its a good thing that people are born and immediately put in danger of eternal torment. Basically, you're very evil or very stupid and its probably some 80/20 deal.

>>12594150
He shouldn't create suffering though...

>>12594153
>I thought humans were unjust?

Got'em

>>12594172
It most definitely was not, and you can’t prove me wrong because you’re not going to find anything Anselm ever said about the inherent evil of the human soul

>>12594150
I, being not an atheist but a dystheist, propose he shouldn't have created any world at all. A perfect being would have no such need to create anything. Clearly we're dealing with an imperfect being that EXPECTS something of his creation and that alone is profoundly disturbing.

>>12594181
WHY

>>12594189
So you believe someone can be justified by their works? Someone who doesn't transgress God's law is justified without Christ. That's a very flimsy Christianity you got there.

>>12594193
How is God perfect without creation? It is THROUGH the creation that God is perfect. God isn’t God if there is no creation. Do you just think God is a magical bearded wizard with an omniscient mind without creation?

>>12594177
>thinking that danger is a bad thing
I seriously hope you never have children. You sound like you’d be the kind of parent to cover his kid in bubble wrap before teaching him to ride a bike. You’s be the kind of mother who breastfeeds her first born until he’s seven

>>12594167
You are the most evil man I've ever personally witnessed.

>>12594199
>the alternative to being totally depraved is being justified by works
I think neither.

>>12594136
>No one has that much influence on his children
Which you're basing off of "because my system doesn't work if anyone did."

If people stop having children, evil people stop existing. Causality exists. Supernatural free will outside of the chain of causality has no rigorous philosophical basis.

>>12594202
>the danger of falling off a bike is equivalent in any way to the danger of being tormented endlessly for all time

You can't move your king into check anon! That's against the rules.

>>12594203
How is he the most evil man? Unlike any of the Christians in this thread, he seems to actually care about people's well-being.

Can you fags please get names I can't keep track of all of you

>>12594200
No but you do, except with creation

>>12594153
>I thought humans were unjust?
not if theyre particularly good at being human
>the only alternative to being an effeminate hippie is being a hyper- masculine bloodthirsty warrior
well you’ve done a good job of pinpointing the two extreme untruths. Poke around somewhere in between those dichotomies and you’ll find the truth eventually.

>>12594223
alright

>>12594194
>>12593857

>>12594226
>not if theyre particularly good at being human
Like you?
>the only alternative to being an effeminate hippie is being a hyper- masculine bloodthirsty warrior
Shut up you Jewish rat. You were the one who wanted to slander your opposition by calling them effete and now that your narrative has been invalidated you're writhing like a snake. You ARE the effete, dude.

>>12594213
show me where is the line between an acceptable danger and an unacceptable danger and maybe i’ll start to take you seriously.

>>12593903
Christian scripture speaks on this. It literally states that Satan is the god of this world. So you are right the god, notice lowercase g, of this world is not the, as you put it, platonic God. However, if you think about it, it doesn’t matter because the God that created the categories that make up existence is the ultimate and everything is derived from Him. In my silly little mouse maze analogy, if these mice were able to think deeply they may arrive to the conclusion that the human(s) who grew them, feed them, house them, etc. are god(s). In comparison to them we are god-like but we are no closer to God compared to them than we are to any mouse in our reality. We constructed a universe for them but not one that is any more or less distant from the categories that God used to create existence itself. So your issue of this ‘direct line’ to Him doesn’t register. Why wouldn’t we have a direct line to Him if we are created beings with spirit?

>>12594223
no

How do you draw logic from this: man isn't capable of comprehending god therefore how can you question him? Do you question other Gods or do you believe in all gods?

>>12594245
>when your so entrenched in your belief system you lose your theory of mind

>>12594257
Once again the issue is how do I know this? This entire world could just be a fucking app for all I know. In that case God is just some being who is more powerful than me. That's all I know. I don't know he is the platonic ultimate divine principle and therefore, why shouldn't I question him?

>>12594242
>Like you?
Never claimed I was. Whether I am or not isn’t really relevant

idk what the hell you mean by “destroying my narrative.” I claim it’s bad to have an effeminate aversion to punishment by suffering. You claim I must think it’s a good thing to have an Indo- European warrior mentality. I say that that’s also bad and that one’s demeanor ought to be between those two extremes. I don’t see how anything you just said advanced the discussion.

>>12594267
evil evil evil

>>12594245
>Christian scripture speaks on this. It literally states that Satan is the god of this world.
Can you cite that? I've seen Farrakhan preach on that, and I know Revelation is all about the end of "this world," so I don't doubt you, but never read it explicitly. I've also seen a lot of Baptists who celebrate creation, but maybe either I or they are misinterpreting their praise for optimistic liking rather than reverential awe.

>>12594252
Sit on it, faggot.

>>12594238
Doesn’t explain why God should create a world without suffering. God didn’t evolve from monkeys. Faith is important because this is how God perceives Himself.

>>12594267
By theory of mind are you trying to say mind or are you making a filthy point about monism?
>>12594286
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.biblegateway.com/passage/%3fsearch=2%2bCorinthians%2b4:4&version=NLT%3bAMP%3bKJV&interface=amp

Atheists: design a world that cannot possibly be criticized by anyone. Pro tip: you can’t.

Alternatively: create a world that will give you, God, the most benefit. Remember that, as a God, you don’t have a biological brain, so pleasure doesn’t really mean anything to you.

>>12594292
“no”

>>12594303
By theory of mind I mean that you are actually completely blind to the fact that your argument only works in convincing someone who is already viewing the world through a strictly Christian, or at least abrahamic, lens.

This is dire when engaged in debate because its like not even being able to see the move options available to your opponent.

>>12594309
I already said that if I was Platonic God, I wouldn't need to create anything. Platonic God is unity and void.

>>12594049
Maybe suffering brings about a greater good than would be possible without ever suffering.

>>12594276
Based

>>12594281
>Never claimed I was. Whether I am or not isn’t really relevant
You're transparent.

>I claim it’s bad to have an effeminate aversion to punishment by suffering.
Yes, and that isn't the case because masculinity is traditionally associated with classes that ignored your values (I hate the dichotomy, but you broadly fall into Nietzsche's slave morality).

>I say that that’s also bad and that one’s demeanor ought to be between those two extremes.
No, you wanted to characterize your opposition's values as inherently effete but don't actually understand that historically the desire for justice is associated with enormous fags who can't let things go because they're essentially (constitutionally, spiritually, physically) impotent to effect change in this world. If you had any idea of how illusory a world of limits and bounds is in contrast to boundlessness, you wouldn't feel any need to ensure people were burning in hellfire for sleights that - in the grand scheme of infinity and eternity - shouldn't matter whatsoever.

>>12594293
I agree that suffering is necessary

>>12594333
Not really what theory of mind means, more correctly stated would be ‘mindset’ or mentality but okay. We are in a thread about Christianity.
My statements apply to any religious mindset that accepts a creator God, He who established the categories for existence. The anon I was replying to brought up the issue of multiple levels of godhood so what I stated was specifically in reply to him. I don’t understand what you’re trying to allude to. Which moves are available to you in that context?

>>12594350
Possible.

>>12594365
Theory of mind means understanding that other people can be working with different information than you are. You are making appeals that someone who is Christian would respect and understand but not anyone else. I'll break down your arguments.

>Christian scripture speaks on this. It literally states that Satan is the god of this world. So you are right the god, notice lowercase g, of this world is not the, as you put it, platonic God

Tryin' to be a cheeky cunt are we? (probably not, in actuality you probably think this is some sort of concession)

>However, if you think about it, it doesn’t matter because the God that created the categories that make up existence is the ultimate and everything is derived from Him.

Okay but why is this your God? He could have got these protocols from elsewhere.

> In my silly little mouse maze analogy, if these mice were able to think deeply they may arrive to the conclusion that the human(s) who grew them, feed them, house them, etc. are god(s). In comparison to them we are god-like but we are no closer to God compared to them than we are to any mouse in our reality.

I'm just supposed to take your word for it?

>We constructed a universe for them but not one that is any more or less distant from the categories that God used to create existence itself.

Once again, which God?

>So your issue of this ‘direct line’ to Him doesn’t register. Why wouldn’t we have a direct line to Him if we are created beings with spirit?

This is a sermon at this point.

>>12594398
My first point about Satan was merely to show the anon that these are not new questions for Christians. This idea of higher order gods, deceptive gods, inability to communicate to the most high are all things that have been considered by Christian philosophers and theologians. The possibility of a lower level god “of this world” is directly in scripture. The evil genie that later became the brain in a vat have been written of and debated in great detail.

As for your points, how could he (whatever hypothetical lower god you’ve conceived of) have gotten protocols from elsewhere to create categories of existence if he himself was a created being? That would be a philosophical conundrum you would have to grapple with in order to make your point clearer. You’re saying that somehow a lower god, separate from He who created the categories of existence, was created and then created the categories of existence? When I say everything is derived from Him, I don’t mean to say that he directs every sperm cell that fertilizers an egg but simply that He is the prime mover.

I am not sure what you are trying to say about the mouse example. You can conceive of a way in which these beings are further apart from a standard mouse from the categories of existence?

>>12594338
Honest question - if Gnostics believe that, why don't they just kill themselves?

>>12594444
>ho n es t questio n
>its a d isho nes t questio n

>>12594453
No, I'm serious. If God is void, then isn't dying equivalent to "enlightenment"?

>>12594546
and now u know why buddhism is an oriental death cult, congratulations

>>12594546
I think he might have killed himself

>>12593081
I think that God's very nature is suffering. The serpent told Adam and Eve that by eating from the tree of knowledge they would be like God, and he wasn't lying. Subsequently Adam and Eve became like God and had to experience suffering for the rest of eternity, living on through innumerable generations of pain.

tl;dr God is actually Slaanesh

>>12594606
This is the only post in the thread that is activating my almonds

>>12593161
Yes since her suffering grants her the path to heaven where she'll be happy.

>>12594606
I'm pretty sure what you just said is heresy but I like it

>>12594054
You cant say God is evil because good and evil are concepts controlled by God. God can rewrite your intuition and the nature of reality to the point that evil is the opposite of what you previously believed

>>12593081
Joh 3:16 KJV
16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

>>12593910
showing your ignorance of the scriptures, the entire new testament is testifying to the promise of a new creation

>>12593365
Tolkien understood this.
In The Silmarillion, only the people who took part, or where involved in 'bad' shit actually did anything worth writing stories about.

>>12593081
based

What the fuck are you supposed to do for an eternity in heaven/hell?

>>12594552
Yeah I unironically already believed that

>>12594590
Oof

To have no struggle makes the activity pointless.

>god sacrifices himself so that everyone, if they so choose, may be saved
>"HE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING TO SAVE US"

read the bible

>>12594590
kek

>>12594193
Read Plotinus

>>12595040
He didn't "sacrifice" anything retard. Sacrifice implies loss of something. Jesus/god/YHWH didn't lose shit.

Only if you have been in the deepest valley, can you ever know how magnificent it is to be on the highest mountain.

>>12593294
>>12593968
You don't understand God. You can't even begin to guess at divine motives. Here is some of what Aristotle, Plotinus, and Aquinas have shown (you can go over the proofs yourself):

-God is perfect.
-God is good.
-God is the cause of all things.

Now put those facts together, and realize that 'evil' is a mortal word for things we don't like. Children sometimes think their parents are evil for depriving them of joy or autonomy, because they don't understand their parents motives or reason. So it is between you and God. You don't and can't understand. But you should trust that all of it is for the good, even the worst suffering. And I don't mean the "greater good" of man. I mean to align man to God.

>>12593081
>god could easily without any effort on his part help everyone in the world
Thats literally what God did though by incarnating as Christ and giving us the Gospel.

>>12594193
>God is not perfect hurr durr
go back to /x/

>>12595057
Why should I trust something incomprehensible.

>>12595064
The mind of God is incomprehensible. God's nature is known in part, discovered in philosophy and revealed by Jesus Christ.

>>12595067
What is it?

>>12595069
I already told you: perfect, good, first cause. Think on these complimentary attributes for a while. Consider the consequences of their being common to the creator.

That is: would it even be possible for a perfect being (ie, without mistakes), that is entirely good and the first cause (ie, made creation from a superabundance of goodness)... would it be possible for such a thing to make "evil?" Or is evil something we name ourselves?

>>12595074
So what if his perfect good is raping my ass. You didn't answer why should I trust him.

>>12595049
>Sacrifice implies loss of something.

no it fucking doesn't retard lmfao

>>12595108
>So what if his perfect good is raping my ass.
It's not HIS perfect good, it's THE perfect good.

And if the perfect good is an ass raping, then you better limber up.

>>12595108
>So what if his perfect good is raping my ass.
God doesn't make mistakes.

Don't misunderstand, this doesn't imply your ass getting raped (or whatever) is *deserved*. That is a human concept. Same as evil. Just... your suffering is to a good end that you are almost certainly unaware of.

>>12595049
Jesus was fully man and fully divine. He endured torture and sacrificed his life. So did most of the apostles who knew him.

>>12595112
So if I have infinite money and give a homeless guy 10$. I sacrificed those 10 dollars? Retard

>>12595112
>Mark 12:
>43 And he called unto him his disciples, and saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That this poor widow hath cast more in,, than all they which have cast into the treasury:
>44 For all they did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even all her living.
Jesus directly states that goodness of sacrifice or charity is proportional to its relative value to you, so it might be argued that sacrifice is made only by Son of Man, but not by the Son of God (infinite and almighty). So basically, MAN had suffered for our sins, but not God.

>>12595120
>Jesus was fully man and fully divine
Yeah he also was the god and those other guys were the god but weren't each other too but jesus wasnt those guys but was god the god just like them but he wan't them
Spare me this nonsense

>>12595171
Are you having a stroke?

>>12595171
>Spare me this nonsense
no u.

>>12595120
Again why the fuck would I praise the guy who rapes me If I can't understand whats good for me in rape then there is only the pain of my ass being torn, thats the only thing that matters to me in this situation

>>12595176
No bro I just concisely explained trinity to you

>>12595179
Oh, my apologies. Are you fucking insane?

>>12595181
Seek answer from christians

>Gnostics and Positive Theologians
Y'all need to stop with these limitation.
"God can't make mistakes" he can if he wants to.

>>12595194
But why would he make a mistake

>>12595162
God made himself Man to make Man God.

>>12595198
Why wouldn't he?

>>12595194
>"God can't make mistakes" he can if he wants to.
Are you sure you aren't a brainlet? You're hung up on words just like otheranon. Mistake is a human word for not agreeing with God, putting the blame where it belongs if you like.

>>12595178
Maybe theology isn't for you. Rage against God all your life if you like, you'll only die tired.

>>12595198
Because he's free to do whatever the fuck he wants? Including being a snail for a month.

>>12593081
God is truly dead.. or more like in a coma

Humans are the consciousness of God. It's up to us to take up the mantle, unite, and heal our collective self.

>>12595203
>>12595205
Because there is no good reason to make a mistake?

>>12593132
>Why didn’t God make a better world?
>You: Because that wouldn’t help the people in the terrible world that He decided to make instead!
Nonsense

>>12595212
The point is: to say he *can't* do something is a limitation, he can do anything.

>>12595204
You didn't refute what I've said nor did you try to answer my question. Instead opting for a passive agressive "you don't get it don't try".
Well shit, where can I get baptised?

>>12595204
>Muh actus purus

>>12595223
>Again why the fuck would I praise the guy
Because he made you, and you will return to him. Because it is right to praise what is perfect. You evidently haven't done the work to understand this yet, and probably haven't even looked at the proofs you should have read before ever discussing metaphysics.

You REALLY won't get it if you don't try. That's just the nature of knowledge, anon. Sorry to break this to you.

>>12595228
Problem?

>>12595232
He created me so I'll get assraped by him? His perfection is my misery? Those are the reasons to love him? Whats wrong with you?

>>12595234
>be uncreated
>is somehow limited by created things
You need some thiccc negative theology

>>12595238
You forgot this:
>your suffering is to a good end that you are almost certainly unaware of.

Imagine that you, anon, had the capacity to know everyone on your block. Know them perfectly, their every thought and every intention conscious and unconscious. All their fears and shames and joys and secrets, perfectly known to you without effort or confusion on your part. What would you do with this knowledge? You're a mortal. I know what you'd do with it.

But let's pretend you are a perfect being, the source of all goodness and charity in the world in fact. The fruits of the Holy Spirit come to mankind from you. You want the best for them, and they have been taught to want to be good. This influence makes the people want to be more like you, who is perfect. Jesus revealed this is our most desirable purpose, to be perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect. This is called the universal call to holiness, and not everyone can hear it. The reason is man is not perfect.

Now consider that the world, being fallen because of man's failings, contains people who do not know to want these fruits, or to be good, because they have not heard the call. This is us. We are the cause of evil.

>assraped by him?
No, you'd be assraped by a human. Read Job. You are a piece of clay.

>>12593081
>reads low tier catholic apologetics
>GOD IS FAKE AND I AM THE ONLY ONE TO KNOW FOR SURE

>>12595281
>perfectly known to you without effort or confusion on your part.
>implying God has no choice in what wants to know
>implying that information forces itself on God
God is only as omniscient as he wants to be.

>>12595281
>>your suffering is to a good end that you are almost certainly unaware of.
Do you read my posts? I'll repeat if I'm unaware of this good end then it means nothing to me, what's there is pain/discomfort. Also why do think that god isn't bound by human view on whats "evil" but is bound by whats "good". For all I know his good end will be fucking my mouth after he's done raping me.

>You want the best for them, and they have been taught to want to be good.
How do you know any of this? How can you say this? Few posts ago you said that his mind is incomprehesible but now you know his exact thoughts? What kind of doublethink is that?

>>12595304
>implying that God did not come as the Logos
I never claimed to know what God thinks. These are just inferences based in scripture, the catechism, and Christian philosophy.

>>12595312
>if I'm unaware of this good end then it means nothing to me, what's there is pain
Then you are an insect?

>How do you know any of this?
See previous post. The answers to these questions are literally quotes from Jesus or Paul, or Aquinas, or Aristotle and/or Plotinus, or the catechism.

>>12595320
>Then you are an insect?
What's your reasoning behind this question?

>literally quotes from Jesus or Paul, or Aquinas, or Aristotle and/or Plotinus, or the catechism.
So these people can grasp at the incomrehesible nature of god and make humanly logical conclusions based on it?

Also you didn't answer why god's evil can be good but god's good can't be evil.

>>12595330
>What's your reasoning behind this question?
You react only to stimuli? You cannot imagine suffering that is worthwhile or serves the good? How about an example. Doesn't giving $10 to someone in need cause you to suffer? It is a sacrifice. If you are poor yourself it may cause hardship. But it is suffering for the sake of charity. It shares in the form of the good, it is you behaving as God wants you to behave. As Jesus taught you to behave.

>So these people can grasp at the incomrehesible nature of god and make humanly logical conclusions based on it?
They're the best we've got.

>Also you didn't answer why god's evil can be good but god's good can't be evil.
I never claimed God was capable of evil. You did. You're still not grasping that what you call evil -- illustrated as your own suffering, so far -- is just a word. It is not a punishment. It is not deserved. It is something caused by man, who, while a created being, is not without agency and very frequently chooses other than good.

Again, you should really read Job. And those other guys. Especially if you're sick of being spoonfed. Go engage with these ideas yourself, see what you think.

>>12593132
>He created shit but at least we can pick the peanuts out of it

How about not creating it in the first place?

>inb4 why doesn't God jump on down here and put a stop to any and all suffering, especially me and my hypothetical assraping
This is basically what you're asking for anon. Jesus came to teach that God wants you to behave a certain way. An objective morality was revealed. The teaching is still with us. Why doesn't God interfere? Because God wants you to love him -- to love goodness -- and that's not how love works. You can't make someone love. They must be inspired to love.

>>12593081

Shut the fuck up you clearly have never read philosophy, go back to /tv/ you fucking midwit

>>12595348
>They're the best we've go
The best of nothing is nothing. So you can't say for sure?

I'm not arguing whether god is good or bad or whatever. What I'm saying is if he is so unlike us why bother worshiping him.

>>12593081
>thinking god owns you anything in the first place
The bizarre physician analogy is just onother analogy. I could as well say that you are looking for a nanny.
Second and more importantly, god came to offer salvation to all that have faith and transform their lives. Suffering is not even irrelevant in this, it is often essential.

>>12593081
If we had freewill why would orgasm be necessary?

>>12595384
>Because God wants you to love him
Why? And how can you be so sure?

>>12593081
Any arguments against this are literally cope. Just look at this thread. Christfags are delusional. God hates us, we are doomed.

>>12595392
I already answered this. Because God is good, and perfect, and the creator. Among other things.

>>12595402
Read Galatians. Read Kempis. Read Plato and Aquinas. The Good, if taken as first cause (which is the case in Christian mythos), is necessarily interested in the soul of man and redeeming him. In reconfiguring man to himself, to holiness, to goodness. Because to do so is to have a share in goodness, which is what God is. We are not only physical bodies, we are of subtler stuff: the essense of man contains a soul. Goodness deserves to be loved for its own sake, and love is the only thing we want for itself. The irony is loving goodness is good for us. Mortals have ego. God desiring our love for good is not that.

I should say: we mortals love selfishly. God does not.

>>12595428
>God is good, and perfect, and the creator. Among other things
Perfect? Okay. Creator? Okay. Why is he good? How can our understanding of whats good apply to him. He is everything at once and nothing, that's what I imagine when thinking of something infinetely complex. How can you talk about his pshyche when it's so beyond us. I don't understand this.

>>12595459
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_of_the_Good

Besides the obvious scripture we've been discussing, the fruits of the Holy Spirit, and the peace and unity that Jesus' message brings... it follows that what is perfect is essentially good.

>>12593904
Motivation is not always driven by need or lack of something. God wanting creation doesn't mean he is not complete by himself.

>>12595467
I feel like I'm not read enough to continue this, I'll look more into what we were discussing. Thanks for your time.

If the only pain that ever existed were stubbed toes we would still be asking God why he allows pain and suffering because from our perspective stubbed toes would be a great evil. For all we know he is alleviating some pain. He wouldn't stop all pain and force us to live in protective bubbles because that would be a violation of choice.

>>12593725

It is integral to Christianity that God is self-sufficient, MOST OF ALL integral to your brand of shitty Theodicy. Stupid hedging bitch.

>>12595482
Thanks for your interest.

>>12595160
think before you post

>>12595057
>Children sometimes think their parents are evil for depriving them of joy or autonomy, because they don't understand their parents motives or reason. So it is between you and God.

Moronic and anti-Christian argument. That the relation between God and Man is explicitly NOT like the one between parent and child and master and slave is a point of tremendous importance and contention, Jesus himself being hated and executed for making it.

>>12595514
No. Jesus was crucified for claiming to be able to rebuilt the Temple in three days. And he did, he rebuilt it in himself.

I was speaking to anon about his misunderstanding of God. Not describing any kind of doctrine.

>>12595215

Not nonsense at all. It only means that God isn't about maximising abstract utility, but loves particular creatures in particular worlds, such that he allows even imperfection as the acceptable price of having them at all. Even an imperfect existence is better than no existence, since goodness is being- everything which is, then, benefits from the divine love, even if that love tolerates imperfection.

If the problem of evil is about reconciling a God of perfect love to the world we find, this theodicy quite handily resolves it, especially when the means has been given to experience the infinite good as well.

If on the other hand the problem of evil is only about resenting God for not being a utility-maximiser, that's not really the kind of thing any religious person is interested in proposing God to be in the first place.

>>12595355

How would that help us, or heal the hurts we have? God doesn't will our good any better by declining to create us.

>>12595400
Because no matter how much it is counter memed, we still have both an active and a passive nature.

>>12595467

Ignoring that none of your replies make grammatical sense, let alone Logical sense, the claim that God is perfect is at odds with the claim that God is incomprehensible. For every Epistemological unit allowing you think of him as perfect is a unit preventing you from thinking of him as incomprehensible, and vice versa.

>>12595563
>the claim that God is perfect is at odds with the claim that God is incomprehensible
Providence is a mystery. Some of the attributes of God, however, are known. Familiarize yourself.

>>12595563

Not at all. Incomprehensibility is still compatible with analogical predication. To 'comprehend' something to grasp its intrinsic nature, but to attribute perfection to God is only to say that the finite perfections of finite things (which we do comprehend) point beyond themselves to something which we can't directly comprehend. It is to know God not in himself, but through the things related to him which we do know in themselves.

>>12595573

Even when replying simply to concede, you can't abstain from shitty sassy aphorisms. Fuck off.

All theists, please send all of your personal information to thisisgodnotascam at gmail. I am the personal representative of God and I need your support. I'm looking to improve the spiritual health of people in ways that are far too deep for your understanding. Send all information immediately. You cannot prove I am not communicating directly with God. Send your information now or risk displeasing a deity.

>>12593081
>implying god has freewill

>>12595575

What makes you attribute the perfection you do know to something you don't know?

>>12595588
No u. I was not conceding, I was giving a sincere reply to clarify your misconception. There is a difference between what God thinks and what God is. We don't know the former. We know some of the latter. What's the problem, wise one?

>>12595600

Because understanding even qualified perfection aright implies the unqualified perfection it approximates.

>>12595592
I think you are, IN FACT, a man. The voice of God creates and destroys. You would, at best, be an angel. But I think it is more likely you are a shitposter. Nice try anon.

>>12595613

You are displeasing God by not following his will. Send your money now or guarantee yourself a place in eternal torment.

>>12595613

You better PROVE he's IN FACT just A MAN anon

>>12595623
Okay okay okay. I'll drop off some cash at my local church, it will go to charity. Thanks God.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmzIKX4xNyM

>>12595610

How so? Qualified perfection could imply many things including unqualified Evil, or whatever your preferred definition for the antithesis of Perfection is, if you are truly honest in saying you do not comprehend what it implies.

>>12595635

Insufficient. Your church is not using their resources the way God intends them to. The money must go directly to me, God's chosen representative. Prove this is not true and God will let you off the hook.

>>12595644
>Your church is not using their resources the way God intends them to.
read Matthew 18.

>>12595627
I just did.

>>12595715

It looks like 3 young children somewhere in the world just died because you presumed to know God. You are the cause of the world's suffering. I hope you're happy.

>>12595641

Evil has negative existential status, since it is a lack in what ought to *be*. So whatever else it might be, unqualified perfection cannot be unqualified evil, which just is nothing. While it is not possible to say of the incomprehensible what it is, it is very easy to say what it is not.

A world without suffering is inferior and makes no sense. It prevents the existence of certain good such as bravery, sacrifice, compassion, etc. that exists in this world. Why should these things not exist? Not only that, but a world without suffering would have no meaning. Why do anything? Do you really think God should make a world of constant dopamine rush? Why WOULD He desire such a world? God is not a biological entity, so why should He favor pleasure so much? Such a world would not display God’s omnipotence, nor would it create a desire in humans for God. Then God will not understand Himself. Atheists complain and criticize God because of this world, but they only want things for themselves. They don’t understand the motivations of God, but think He should never allow suffering at all, as if the whole universe revolves around them. And ironically, we do have a way to relieve suffering, thanks to Jesus Christ. Yet atheists call God evil while rejecting Him, knowing what might happen if they do. They have no reason, only emotions, and pride is one of their biggest.

>>12593725
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa he worships the demiurge

>>12593725
God by definition, would be fully satisfied in himself. Creation doesn't 'satisfy' God, because he his perfect and fulfilled in every way.
>He’s not some fully sentient being
>What is omnipotence if God doesn’t even create
You yourself said he isn't a being, so why did you immediately anthropomorphize him in your next sentence?

>>12595975

This thread is an abomination.

>>12594443
No, I'm saying he DIDN'T create those at all. He merely copied them over.

>>12596136
>God by definition, would be fully satisfied in himself.
By whose definition? You just made this up.
>Creation doesn't 'satisfy' God, because he his perfect and fulfilled in every way.
Then why is there creation at all?
>You yourself said he isn't a being, so why did you immediately anthropomorphize him in your next sentence?
How did I anthropomorphise God?

>>12594672
Okay, I wont say he's evil. I'll just say he is sadistic.

>>12594054
I recognize you from another thread! based schizo, but know that one of the axioms of this world is that everyone gets another chance for salvation, as long as there's life there's hope, and those who believe in Him will live, even after dying.
I was once like you, perhaps still am, as it's so easy to indulge in the shadow. But know that you are blind, and all you have to do is trust, as it's the only worthwhile thing to bet on. As you say that you are already one foot in hell, what do you have to lose? I know, that even if I'm both feet in hell, I will still trust, like Abraham as he was raising his knife on Isaac.

>>12596044
>Why do anything?

Even mild suffering like diarrhea, headaches, or common colds drastically reduce one's works.

>>12596174
>By whose definition?
God being a perfect being, he is deficient in no capacity. Are you forfeiting God as a perfect being?
>How did I anthropomorphize God?
By giving him human thoughts, motives, and desires. God as Creator, does not 'desire', for desire and want imply a lack or deficiency. "He creates to complete himself" is false because he is already complete. "He creates because he wants to feel omnipotent" is foolish.
>Then why is there creation at all?
That is the point of this thread. There's no reason for creation, and in fact it is rather incoherent. I am of the opinion that it simply has always existed, which is much more plausible than creation taking place in a point in time before time.

>>12595062
Why would you post that picture?

>>12595074
What if I say Quetzalcoatl is those things instead?

>>12595119
>>12595120
If I choose antinatalism and not to have children then my not having children is the perfect good as well. If I convince others to not have children, then that is also the perfect good If everything that happens is part of the plan then my choices are also part of the plan.

>>12595204
>Maybe theology isn't for you

No kidding. Maybe it isn't for anyone.

>>12596192
>God being a perfect being, he is deficient in no capacity. Are you forfeiting God as a perfect being?
My argument is that God is only perfect with creation, or through creation, which is justified by the existence of creation. What is God without creation?
>By giving him human thoughts, motives, and desires. God as Creator, does not 'desire', for desire and want imply a lack or deficiency. "He creates to complete himself" is false because he is already complete. "He creates because he wants to feel omnipotent" is foolish.
Everything is the movement toward truth. So creation fulfills truth and makes God what God is: omnipotent and omniscient. It is through the creation that God, and everything, are understood. This is how God is glorified. God has a transcendent mind, but only because of creation. God did not desire creation but created it out of necessity.
>I am of the opinion that it simply has always existed, which is much more plausible than creation taking place in a point in time before time.
Which is possible with the existence of God. God is perfect because the creation has always existed. There was never an infinite time when God was alone, doing nothing. God, being outside of time, has created everything, and through the creation, His omniscience is granted to Him.

>>12595281
>we are the cause of evil

Actually no, Lucifer is.

>>12595485
>If the only pain that ever existed were stubbed toes we would still be asking God why he allows pain and suffering because from our perspective stubbed toes would be a great evil.

Yes, in a nearly perfect world any imperfection would stick out like a sore thumb. The question is, why allow any evil to exist?

>>12595348
I fucking GUARANTEE when you are roasting in hell, and you will be, I assure you, that you wont give a flying fuck abut defending your cosmic horror. You'll be like "GET ME OUT OF HERE. FUCK YOU GOD!". So have your fun while it lasts, produce lots of children to go to hell and rest assured in your apologetics.

>>12596234
>The question is, why allow any evil to exist?
To allow for greater forms of good, such as bravery, sacrifice, compassion, etc. Also, I’ll ask you, why NOT allow evil to exist? Why should God favor a world where humans don’t suffer over a world with suffering? Does God have brain like us, driven by biological desires? How would it benefit God to create a “utopia”? He would know nothing of suffering, of what it’s like for a sentient being to experience something that God has never experienced. He wouldn’t know how great He is without viewing the creatures who suffer in the asbsence of Him. Everything is for God, humans are lucky that we can have any happiness at all.

>>12596218
>My argument is that God is only perfect with creation, or through creation
I would argue that this inviolate to conception of God as a perfect being. God would no longer be perfect, and until the end of time, he is imperfect (as he continues to 'justify' himself in linear time). He would furthermore no longer represent the pure difference, as he is locked now in a relationship with creation, in association with creation, and therefore merely a part in a pair. God must represent pure difference, outside of the schema and purely self-subsisting or else he is not longer omnipotent or complete.
>What is God without creation?
God is perfect without creation.
>Everything is the movement toward truth.
>creation fulfills truth... this is how God is glorified
What this implies, if I understand you correctly, is that God is not complete, but in the course of history becomes completed by man (the apprehension of complete Truth). It is this insistence on the necessity of man to God that I feel tramples on Christianity's own conception of a one True God who is all powerful and all knowing. God exists without man, without creation. Salvation is to save Man, not to save God. God is Truth, and before creation God was True and complete (in the beginning there was the Word).

>>12595424
This guy gets it

>>12595428
Do you want to know how I know you haven't read Plato?

>>12595424
They're just heavily ornamented appeals to authority, nothing more. There were a few anons who tried to approach the problem of evil from the angle of utility, but when the going gets tough, they retreat to 'who are we to question, with our mortal conceptions of good and evil'. Having said that, Godfags have at least embraced a potentially feasable way to truly accept and love creation. This is no small feat. Slightly ironic that many behave like the most reprehensible godless creatures when confronted.

>>12595534
>Even an imperfect existence is better than no existence,

"1So I returned, and considered all the oppressions that are done under the sun: and behold the tears of such as were oppressed, and they had no comforter; and on the side of their oppressors there was power; but they had no comforter. 2Wherefore I praised the dead which are already dead more than the living which are yet alive. 3Yea, better is he than both they, which hath not yet been, who hath not seen the evil work that is done under the sun."

>>12596259
>To allow for greater forms of good, such as bravery, sacrifice, compassion, etc. Also, I’ll ask you, why NOT allow evil to exist?
Why make an imperfect world, that allows you both to rise and fall? A perfect thing would by definition have no bad qualities, be it evil or the lack of "bravery, sacrifice, compassion". If in this world you say that you need to have both dark and light, this would make it not wholly perfect, as evil needs to exist. And don't say that the perfect world would be boring, as being boring is not perfection.
On that note, if evil needs to be to see the light, the belief in Heaven is quite amusing. If this world is so much better, why make the afterlife any different? Why not suffer for all eternity, as this would provide infinite opportunity for all those glorious heroes and martyrs? Surely, if you truly love God, you are prepared to do that? haha

>Does God have brain like us, driven by biological desires?
You think God is an unfeeling machine. At least please call what you believe in as the demiurge, I think that would be more fitting. Do you even believe in the soul, the spiritual world?
What you present is very bleak and inhuman, a horror that doesn't know love, a mindless being that figures things out as it goes along.

>>12593081
And he does. All you need is to strive to be Christ-like, yearning for Sainthood all your life. Demands zero effort from God, it's up to you do you obey or not. Path to Salvation is right there.

This is the problem of atheists, they are like commies (and usually they are), assuming everything needs to be ready-made and given to them like gibs, putting zero effort to anything. Then whine when things go to shit and evil exists when the evil is within them and they don't even try to get rid of it. Pathetic.

>>12596266
>God is perfect without creation.
That doesn’t explain what God is without creation. Perfect in what way?

In the rest of your post, you seem to ignore that I said creation has always existed, meaning God has always been perfect. Without creation, God is just potentially perfect, not actually perfect.

>>12596318
>Path to Salvation
What is salvation and why would I want to go there? Enlighten me as to what you expect for yourself.

The kingdom of God is within you, thus being upset at God is self-flaggelation. Why are you hitting yourself OP?

>>12595635
Do you think that kind of music is pleasing to The LORD? Do you think that YOU are pleasing to the LORD for listening to it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9COYTsNwzSM

>>12596313
>If this world is so much better, why make the afterlife any different? Why not suffer for all eternity, as this would provide infinite opportunity for all those glorious heroes and martyrs? Surely, if you truly love God, you are prepared to do that? haha
No one goes to Heaven before experiencing this world. Heaven is, in comparison, paradise. The existence of Hell, Heaven, and earth form a perfect existence TO GOD. This isn’t hard to understand. God did not make the universe solely for humans, but for HIMSELF. Just as humans create literature exploring the truths of existence, so does God create the world with all its truths— joy, suffering, justice, revenge, compassion, sacrifice, anger, war, beauty, sadness, regret, hope, despair, meaning...

You seem to think that God would somehow benefit by making a “perfect” utopia. How is that so? I have yet to see an atheist explain how such a world would actually please God. It MAY please humans, but how does it benefit God or Truth in any way?

>You think God is an unfeeling machine.
So you DO think God has a biological brain. You think he has a big, gray beard, too?

If God exists, and he/it is completely omnipresent and omnipotent, then surely he/it must contain all aspects of existence, right?
So would it be illogical to assert that God has characteristics that we label as good and evil? Wouldn't it make more sense for the entity that progenated reality to be a perfectly neutral balance of all qualities? How could an omniscient being be benevolent?

I'm genuinely curious by the way. I'm loving this thread, it's very interesting.

>>12596322
>Perfect in what way
Perfect in that he lacks nothing, and is not separate in his parts.
>I said creation has always existed
Then what do you mean by 'everything is a movement towards truth'? If creation always perfectly existed, then the truth would be always evident, and there would be no movement. If the trurth comes to fruition in the future, then right now God is incomplete, and if God can be incomplete or unfulfilled he is not omnipotent.
>Without creation, God is just potentially perfect
What do you mean? God is always perfect. Having a mortal witness doesn't make him any more perfect. God exists wholly independently from creation, The Word is perfect and was from before creation, therefore creation does not make God perfect.

>>12596182
What do I have to lose? Promoting dystheistic antinatalism.

>>12596359
Yes, God is objectively good in that He gives existence to all things (the good is that which tends to existence), but God cannot be perfectly good to subjective beings, or at least, not to all of them. And the Bible doesn’t claim that God is omnibenevolent to humans, either. This world was made for God, by God.

>>12596359
God is both good and evil in shaktaism, bro.
God is only good in Christianity, because evil is the absence of good and not inherently real in itself.

>>12596374
>Perfect in that he lacks nothing, and is not separate in his parts
I would say He still lacks creation and omniscience.
>Then what do you mean by 'everything is a movement towards truth'?
It’s a movement, but not a movement, at the same time. I just mean that everything exists for the sake of truth. I don’t how to keep reminding you that everything is timeless. Imagine if the Bible spoke like this every sentence.
>God is always perfect
You still have no reasons why God is perfect without creation. You just cling to it as if it were true, as if everyone should just accept it as an axiom. Why is God perfect without creation?

>>12596318
>All you need is to strive to be Christ-like, yearning for Sainthood all your life.

He says while posting borderline pornography

>>12596357
>God did not make the universe solely for humans, but for HIMSELF.
Get thee behind me, Satan. The demiurge you present is not love. Not feeling, but only thought. A tyrant mind, not a loving Father. You try to understand it by thought alone, scientifically, like an atheist. What you've come up with is even worse than a despot who only sets rules, and torments unbelievers. Such an unfeeling horror is even more evil and perverse.

>>12596403
>Why is God perfect without creation?
Because Christianity is based on the idea that God is omnipotent. If you take that away, as you suggest here, then why worship a pathetic, false god? The implications of what you are suggesting completely invalidate Christianity as the 'true religion' and are bordering on concepts of a demiurge.
Why is god not perfect unless there's creation?
>It’s a movement, but not a movement, at the same time
So God is both complete and incomplete at that same time?
>I don’t how to keep reminding you that everything is timeless
This is the first time your mentioned it, but I would add God is perfect in all timeless points. A non-linear conception of time seems to me to invalidate your idea of creation. Why is there a linear timeline of creation if everything is timeless? What is the point of setting in motion something that doesn't move?
>He still lacks creation and omniscience.
He is omniscient, but to say God is perfect doesn't imply that all things must exist in Him, otherwise you would say God is ultimately Evil, which he obviously is not. Creation isn't a marker for perfection at all, but to say that he needs creation to be perfect implies a lack or deficiency in him.
What you are saying is that God is not perfect and needs man, which I say is foolish.

>>12596446
Romans 9
>19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

>22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

Proverbs 16:4
>4 The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

>>12596446
It's a BDSM thing, some people want God to spank them.

>>12596449
>Because Christianity is based on the idea that God is omnipotent
Define omnipotence, and support your definition with Biblical evidence.
>So God is both complete and incomplete at that same time?
It can be thought of as a movement, but it isn’t actually a movement. We say things to communicate a message, while what we are saying isn’t completely true. Everything exists for the purpose of truth. That better?
>What is the point of setting in motion something that doesn't move?
Well, the experience of a linear timeline is one of the features of existence that completes existence. Without it, how can our minds even exist?
>Creation isn't a marker for perfection at all, but to say that he needs creation to be perfect implies a lack or deficiency in him.
Even if God is perfect without man, He does not understand His own perfection, which requires the creation for comparison, and to see through the eyes of someone who seeks after God, or someone who suffers due to sin. God is not wholly glorified without creation, therefore God is not perfect without creation.

Would you watch a movie where every problem gets solved by some deus ex machina?

>>12596490
Or read a book where the author fixes all the problems of the characters? Or worse, a book in which the characters never suffer at all?

>>12596461
None of this supports your gnostic beliefs, of God somehow needing us, treating us as lab rats used to discover truths of existence.

>>12596490
>>12596498
Which one of you punches themselves (or others) in the face, just to alleviate boredom?

>>12596479
Acts 17:24-25 "God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands"
Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;"
Isaiah 43:13 " Yes, and from ancient days I am he. No one can deliver out of my hand. When I act, who can reverse it?”
Revelation 1:8 "8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty."
Now please do the same and tell me where in the scripture it says God is a unknowing of himself and needs man to save him?
Your entire understanding seems to me to be a faulty and insulting version of God.

>>12596501
>The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.
It won’t go away. It’s right there. You can’t run away from it. What say you, then? If the Lord has made something for Himself, doesn’t that mean that she benefits by the creation? WELL? What say you?!

>>12596512
God wouldn’t punch Himself.

>>12596512
I don't see how what you said has anything to do with the original point, but even then your argument is wrong. Are you saying people don't get out of their way to search competition and conflict, or to engage their life with some kind of struggle. Just look at the video game industry and what the youth craves for at a young age.

>>12596490
>Would you watch a movie where every problem gets solved by some deus ex machina?

>>12596515
God knows all things, for sure, but He is also concerned with glorifying, and knowing, Himself. And all of existence contributes to that goal. >>12596461

>>12593904
>The ultimate creator's thought process operates in the same way as a retarded human

>>12596582
If God is completely perfect and satisfied without creation, then why did He create anything? Genuine question, I must be missing something.

>>12596192
So Newton's first law of motion is incorrect?

>>12596592
>applying physics to theology

>>12596517
One sentence out of context? This is your great claim? lol

First of all, for himself simply means all to have the purpose of serving Him. What is Him? He is not a person like us, but something greater, the Ultimate Good, Love, the greatest thing you can imagine and more. So this is what everything should serve, this greatest, most perfect Good.

In context, the Proverbs talk about responsibility, and the choices we all have to make. The original Hebrew word used is "Ma`aneh", which was unfortunately translated to "for himself" in KJV:
https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/maaneh.html
This means that the verse is how all things will answer to the Lord, yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

>>12596605
Does God benefit by creation or not? If so, how?

>>12596589
because it is good

>gnostics

>>12596618
Do you benefit from Love? If so, how?

Amusing thread

>>12596660
Just answer the question. Does God benefit by creation, or not?

>>12595035
This kind of bullshit is so easy to say from your first world chair, typing on your computer in a airconditioned or centrally heated room, roof over your head, not worrying about your next meal.

>>12594952
There's no suffering in Heaven therefore no boredom. There's no consciousness in Hell therefore no boredom.

>>12596669
I have no idea, this is a "why are we here" type of a question.

The thing is, there is only one God, only one worthy of worship, and you can't assign those gnostic attributes you to Him. The thought experiments in this thread are very amusing and alluring, but they're just that.

If God is real, good and loves us then how come I have no gf???? Checkmate christfags.

>>12596750
I just think it makes most sense to conclude that the existence of suffering is more beneficial to God, and possibly humans, than the non-existence of suffering. I do think that I might be coming up with stuff that isn’t true concerning why God requires that suffering, or prefers it, but I still believe the world is better with it than without it. Most Christians believe free will refutes the problem of evil, but even then, God is preferring freedom along with the existence of suffering rather than paradise. Do angels in heaven not have free will? Even if they don’t, why didn’t God create us to live in Heaven? Etc. Not to mention, some evils aren’t easily explained by free will, such as disease and strange environmental disasters and accidents.

I think the main point that all Christians can agree on, is that it is better for suffering to exist, for whatever reason. Truly, no one can design a better world.

>>12595534
>It only means that God isn't about maximising abstract utility, but loves particular creatures in particular worlds, such that he allows even imperfection as the acceptable price of having them at all
It sounds like you're saying "God makes it just this way because he likes ot this way." But how does that explain anything? Why does he love people who suffer this much more than people who suffer less? And why does he create some people to suffer so much more than others?

>>12596594
>applying theology

>you can't understand God
ok
>but you should still praise him for creating you!
Why? Creating me isn't sufficient for me to praise him. I know people who were raped by their dad as children, should they praise their father for creating them?

>>12597296
According to that "allows even imperfection as the acceptable price of having them at all' logic, all possible versions of a human would exist, as the alternative would be non-existence. Some people suffer more, some less, but that's just chance, chaotic combinations are far more numerous than orderly: painful existence is far more likely. I have no idea if all possibilities exist.

I don't see how He would love some people more, this really is unsubstantiated.

>>12594443
So if I have a son, he should think that the categories of existence were derived directly from me?

>all this gnostic brainletism
You can't know God's thoughts except by revelation, dumdums.

God is a person. Just like with any person, it is a MASSIVE mistake to assume to know his thoughts.