/lit/ - Literature

If god exists and demands you to gut your kids and you disobey him, he'll probably condemn you and them to a worse fate than had you done what he said.

>who are my only chance of even a glimpse of a second life

What an unhealthy way to think about your children.

>>6543725
Good thing he doesn't!

>>6543725
this

>>6543730
Indeed.

>>6543725
>TFW God blackmails you into killing your kid

>>6543725
Congrats on having an asshole as a God then.

>>6543703
hitchens used to be on the far left

>>6543753
not like you'd have a choice

>>6543703
It's so cute seeing new athiests bungle and completely misunderstand basic religious tenants and then act smug about it

>>6543703
I like how he and others use 'muh Cannanites' and 'remember the 6 gorrillion' tactics to try to discredit Christianity. It's hilarious.

>>6544050
Yeh, has me in tears

>>6543703
>ITT pic related
The whole point of that story was that God didn't actually want Abraham to kill his kid. He wanted to know if Abraham really loved God with all his heart, more than even his own son, which the love of your child is the next greatest thing, if not the greatest thing for most other people. It's a very real love that doesn't require faith, but God was testing if the one who would establish his people, had enough faith to commit even the worst act possible but believed enough in God to do so.

That is why right before doing it, an angel stops him.

This can also be seen as a similarity in the New Testament when God gives up his only son for man, except God actually does do that.

>>6544118
But that is still fucking horrible, you cunt.
>how much do you love me?
>more than anything
>so much you would murder your child for me?
>wat
>not saying I really want you to do this...but you didn't say yes, so you're not worthy
That god person is a cunt, no way around it.

>>6544118

> He wanted to know if Abraham really loved God with all his heart, more than even his own son,

That's got to be one of the sickest, most mentally ill types of love ever

>>6544118
Please don't breed (wait a sec, we're on 4chan, all of us are virgins4lyfe, so nvm)

>>6544132
It was a test of faith. What you're describing is if he ACTUALLY wanted Abraham to kill his son, which yeah I also would see as terrible. It was completely a test to see if Abraham trusted and believed in God completely, and Abraham passed.

It's funny because I understand where you're coming from but you don't understand where I am. Think about that for a second and re-evaluate the story.

>>6544155
>What you're describing is if he ACTUALLY wanted Abraham to kill his son
No it really isn't. My post reflected the fact that he didn't actually want that. And while using that as a test of faith isn't as bad as going through with it, it still is very, very bad. That is one fucked up, abusive relationship.

And if I understand you correctly, you're at the point where you would totally sacrifice your son, but that's okay because god doesn't actually demand that.

>>6544132
>>6544134
>applying your arbitrary standards of morality to God
you already lost. read fear and trembling.

>>6544172
>believing in a god that morally offends you
That is indeed impossible to me. Congratulations on switching off your brain though.

>>6544172

>arbitrary standards

Like 'you shouldn't try to murder your kids because a voice in your head says so'?

In that case, I hope I stay lost forever

>>6544132
>>6544171

What you don't get it's that once you assume God to be perfect, there is no way that we can criticize him.

From where you do criticize him? from your 25 years old of experience? from your 15 years old of experience? it's not enough, once you assume god is all-powerfull you can't criticize him, since he knows all in perfect form.

It begs the question though, but all forms of assuming this does this. I don't believe in god, I just understand how you can see that story and still believe in a just god.

>>6544171
You have to be a literal retard to judge the morals of an absolute being which is the source of all that is good.

>>6544183
>From where you do criticize him?

From the fact he commanded a human bbq

>>6544186
And why is that wrong?

>>6544179
>>6544177
>>6544171
>>6544134
>>6544132

Found the gnostics

>>6544171
>Using that as a test of faith is very very bad
That was the whole fucking point of the test. It was one of the most cruel things an 'all-loving' God could ask, but if you actually read all the stories before that, you would see how God had always provided Abraham up to that point and Abraham had grown to trust and believe in God and formed a relationship with God. But then he hears God telling him to do that, which obviously Abraham wasn't just like "Okay sure thing!" he was human and probably extremely resistant but then ultimately decided to listen to God, even if it was completely against Abraham's own will (and any sane person's will). Then God stops him and says enough. The point was that Abraham was founding the chosen people of God (which gets more complicated later) and the founder would be someone with 100% faith in God, not 95%, not 99%, 100%.
>That is one fucked up, abusive relationship.
Nothing bad happens and God blesses Abraham all through out before that even happens. It was simply a test

>And if I understand you correctly, you're at the point where you would totally sacrifice your son, but that's okay because god doesn't actually demand that.
No I wouldn't, because I'm not someone with that much faith and I'm also living in a modern perspective with that story in mind and knowledge that God doesn't actually want you to do that. Of course I wouldn't want to do that, but you seriously come off as an autist (not memeing) if you think I'm supporting Abraham ACTUALLY killing his son. You're missing the whole point of it and then just saying "Hurr that is soooo fucked up God would even ask that of him, how could a God be so loving if he asks you to do that!" without listening to the context and actual point of the story.

>>6544177
>>6544179
are you really this fucking stupid?

>>6544155
Why even bother conducting a test if you know the outcome, though?

Also, I'd go to Hell before I murdered my own children. I'd more readily lend my loyalty to my bloodline than a trickster god who tests us.

I'm not an atheist, but that's not to say I'm terribly fond of our gods, and I'm willing to accept the consequences of that, if it turns out our gods are truly so unforgiving.

>>6544186

You think that suffering and a person life is the best good ever. Like existing is the best thing that could happen to you.

Not even nature thinks like this (>inb4 nature is indifferent), your flesh decays and your bones get thin. The human life is not the best good ever if you believe in trascendence.

>>6544183
>once you assume God to be perfect
Once I did that, I wouldn't be able to consider an entity that asks for validation via child-murder, a god. Because, that's not something a perfect being would do.

Now, you might say, but I have no proper standards of perfection. But in that case, when I call god perfect, it is absolutely meaningless.

>>6544041
They're reflecting on the story exactly as it's written.

>>6544198
oh my god, how can anyone NOT get it this fucking hard

>>6544194

"Stupid" as in I won't murder my family members because a voice in my head told me to?

Yes, definitely

>>6544197

no suffering*

>>6544197

The difference is that nature doesn't command me to love it when it does all these horrible things. Your shitty god does

His response (in the video) was the full retard I expected from Hitchens. I like how he picks number 3 on the al qaeda charter (not that I support them, I don't even know what's on the charter). I wonder what numbers 1 and 2 are? They probably have something to do with the West's interference in the middle east.

The facts are, this isn't western civilization vs. eastern civilization or even christianity vs. islam. It's small groups of pissed off middle easterners against several nations in western europe + america + canada which have a history of going into the region and imposing their will on others. Don't want trouble? Then stop supporting all of these bullshit banana republics like Saudi Arabia. Then Americans are shocked that there is some sort of blowback from their actions.

Hitchens chooses the cultural aspects of the conflict, but it goes far, far beyond that. It only started when America/UK started interfering in other people's affairs. It really has nothing to do with east timor, acid attacks, etc. This was just a byproduct of the mixing of cultures and secondary to the conflict itself.

>>6544208

>nature doesn't command me to love it

>what is will to live

>>6544214

I have no idea what you're talking about

>>6544203
whhhaaaaaa b-but a manipulative cunt of a god is a good thing! cuz he says so!

>>6544118

Why does god need to test anyone's faith? Is he not omniscient?

>>6544214
>living=/=loving

>>6544217

Nature commands you to love life, you become scared about killing yourself, or killing other life, It's not this the love to life?. You must strive and do shit while you decay if you live in nature, despairing about your mortal condition, knowing that you will die and everything is meaningless. Nature forces you to love how you decay everyday, and forces through pain to keep living.

Consciousness makes you see that nature, and life, isn't the best good out of there. God appears after that. God is the anti-nature. That's why God teach you to hate the *flesh*

>>6544224
Only if you're an idiot can you believe in a God who is omniscient, omnipotent, or omnibenevolent.

No, God is not omniscient. This is a common misconception, because we're humans who can't understand God's nature.

>>6544191
remember that lady who drowned her three kids in the bath tub because god told her to do it?

>>6544236

>Only if you're an idiot can you believe in a God

Agreed.

>>6543725

>TFW No Knights of Faith in this thread.

>>6544191
>No I wouldn't, because I'm not someone with that much faith
Oh ok, so you're the kind of person who considers their own unwillingness to kill their child a personal failing. Much better.

>Nothing bad happens and God blesses Abraham all through out before that even happens. It was simply a test
>Nothing bad happens
But taking your child up a mountain to murder him is still bad, even if god stops you. Also, Abraham is now morally compromised.

And the actual point is that we shouldn't listen to our own moral intuitions (which work perfectly fine, remember the tree in the garden? We're decended from a person who knew good from evil.), but follow god even when he demands the repugnant.


Here's a little thought experiment: if Satan could imitate God's voice, wouldn't that allow him to lead christians to genocide, while atheists wouldn't follow?

Is this an epic meme? I've seen it posted at least 4 times in the last couple of days.

Summertime brings out the Jr. High and High School edgy teens

>>6544245
>tfw

>>6544210
as far as I remember, the main points are (in no particular order)

1. US forces to get out of all islamic countries, especially saudi arabia which is the land of the holiest sites
2. USA to stop supporting israel
3. USA to return control of arab-controlled petrochemical resources
4. USA to stop supporting struggles against islamic insurgencies and to condemn oppression of muslim minorities, e.g. jurchens in china, the fighting in kashmir, the chechens, so on and so on
5. self-determination, implicitly a non-saud sharia regime, for saudi arabia
6. end to the wars in afghanistan and iraq

no doubt east timor is one of the offenses on AQ's list, but claiming the right for muslim countries to annex other countries is their main goal is preposterous. The entire movement sprung out of fighting the Soviet (infidel) occupation of Afghanistan, a Muslim land, and since the early 90s and US forces arriving in Saudi Arabia for the Gulf War, it's been reversing US influence in the Islamic world and, again, especially in Saudi Arabia which is regarded as a US puppet state

Christ this thread was raided by redditors who have no understanding of Christianity or theology. Or well the ability to look things from more perspectives.

>>6544191
>Nothing bad happens and God blesses Abraham all through out before that even happens. It was simply a test
Hey, this is God speaking. You probably didn't expect me to contact you through 4chan but incomprehensible to the human mind are my ways. So anyway, listen: I need you to stab yourself in the heart. Go grab a kitchen knife, make sure it's adequately sharpened, and then shove it in there real good. I know it might sound weird but I need you to just trust me. I can tell from your post that you are a reasonable man and will see how reasonable my request is.

- with love, God

>>6544325
Of course when God said somet.... Fuck why try?
Read a book sometimes. And something not by Hitchens. Learn to ethics.
Faggot.

>>6544325

I would erase that post considering how many schizos visit this page

>>6544325
Fuck. I'm not religious, but I feel a strong desire to follow these instructions. What if it is a real test?

>>6544368
it is real, why would God deceive us?

>>6544368

I felt a strong desire to kill myself but i'm suicidal, no faith stuff really

>>6544370
Why wouldn't he?

I would, in his position. You're all faggots.
Who the fuck actually cares about any of this?

we're going to need a bigger hat

fugn ebin

OP here, I can't even remember what was in the clip. I just started browsing YouTube hitchens videos and I randomly heard the quote in the OP and thought it was amusing enough to post as Hitchensposting. I didn't even watch all of the video. Also I don't even think the pic is a memepic, I got it off of google images.

>>6543725
please consider teleological suspension of the ethical.

>>6544387
A lot of people care and have cared throughout history anon. Indeed, religion has propelled some of the greatest scientific breakthroughs in human history

>>6544501
No thanks

>>6544507
And it has yet to prove a single thing of science wrong.

>>6544557
your point?

>>6544507
>Indeed, religion has propelled some of the greatest scientific breakthroughs in human history

And Newton believed in alchemy. That doesn't make alchemy true

>>6544567
Religion transcends the true/false dichotomy

>>6544241
There's a difference between hearing God's voice and hearing Satan's. It's distinct and that is part of the story. Also, we know already God doesn't ever actually want people to do that, which he didn't even actually want Abraham to do that in this story.
>>6544248
>So you're the kind of person who considers their own unwillingness to kill their child a personal failing
Again you're just tip-toeing and dancing around the actual point and then projecting false accusations against me. No, I don't consider that a personal failing. I'm saying, if I was in Abraham's shoes, I wouldn't have done it and neither would anyone really, except Abraham had ultimate faith in God and even though he knew it was terrible, he heard God instruct him, he knew it was God's voice and he reluctantly decided to obey, from which God stopped him, because he wanted to test him to make sure he was willing to do whatever God commanded, even if it seemed ridiculous.
>>6544248
>And the actual point is that we shouldn't listen to our own moral intuitions
That isn't the point of this story, you're literally talking out of your ass. It is about trusting in God but we have a moral compass for a reason. This story isn't revolving around the theme of ignoring your moral compass, it's about a founding of a people and of a specific scenario where God asks the ridiculous to a man who is founding an entire nation of people under his name, which demands a founder of unquestionable faith. I doubt God would ever ask this ever again to anyone, which by the way he wasn't actually wanting that, it was simply a test.
>We're descended from a person who knew good from evil
That comparison to this context shows you really don't have an understanding of scripture and you are just giving a laymen's hamfisted approach to theology. Evil is literally just the absence of God, taken in various forms.

>Here's a little thought experiment: if Satan could imitate God's voice, wouldn't that allow him to lead christians to genocide, while atheists wouldn't follow?
When you begin to understand God you understand his will and what he wants. It's never in violence or against other fellow human beings, unless it is within defense.

You seriously show that you've never actually been into theology before because these are questions I would hear from people way back in Freshman year of high school. If you want a lot more in-depth, ask a Catholic priest, because they are trained (they actually go to school for this as well) and can give you answers, since from the tone of your post I'm sure you have multiple theological questions and I don't have the time to keep checking up on this thread.

>>6544575

No it doesn't. It's claims about reality and therefore held to the same standard as any other set of claims about reality

>>6544588
>There's a difference between hearing God's voice and hearing Satan's

And how do you know the difference?

>>6544595
do you really think you know more than god?

>>6544603

Why do I have to assert god exists in the first place? Why don't you demonstrate your claims first

>>6544600
You feel it or when the voice is condescending and going against love, either against yourself or other people. When it wants you to commit anything to harm others or yourself or bring yourself or others down, that isn't God speaking. Eventually you don't even need to rely on that as a basis because you literally feel when it's God speaking to you, which is more from the heart than from the mind. It's hard to describe because it's literally something you feel and as your relationship grows it becomes easier to distinguish if it's God talking, or just yourself or Satan. I

This story is the exception because Abraham had a relationship with God to where he could easily distinguish his voice and knew this was God speaking to him, yet it seemed ridiculous and contradictory to God, yet he still knew that this was God speaking. In the end, it was God speaking but his reasoning was more complicated than just, "I want you to kill your son." And in the end, God really never wanted Abraham to harm his son at all.

That is why this story is so unique.

>>6544608
The good thing is that you don't have to. God already makes himself known to those who want to hear him!

>>6544613
>You feel it

So it's completely subjective?

>when the voice is condescending and going against love, either against yourself or other people.

Like committing genocide on Canaanites?

>This story is the exception because Abraham had a relationship with God to where he could easily distinguish his voice and knew this was God speaking to him, yet it seemed ridiculous and contradictory to God, yet he still knew that this was God speaking.

I specifically asked you how he did this, not that he apparently did it (not according to me, but whatever)

>>6544608

Because there is no other tenable or more satisfactory explanation for existence to begin with.

It's like we're being raided or something. Only long time browser of /lit/ has gone through these debates and arguments a thousand times over.

Also, does anyone have the Kirkegaard meme where there's some green text saying, "Real fucking shame your belief in science requires a leap of faith" or something like that. I feel it applies to this thread.

HOW THE FUCK ARE PEOPLE SINCERELY DISCUSSING THE ABRAHAMIC FAITH IN 2015
IT LITERALLY TAKES AN IQ OF AT LEAST 100 AND 15 MINUTES OF FREE TIME TO REALIZE IT'S ALL BULLSHIT

TOSS YOUR FEDORA PICS AT ME, IT DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING

DETERMINISM ALREADY DISPROVES FREE WILL
EVERYTHING, LITERALLY EVERYTHING IS A SLAVE TO THE LAWS OF CAUSALITY

FOR THAT REASON GOD CANNOT JUDGE US FOR OUR SINS OR OUR VIRTUES

ABRAHAMIC FAITH IS FUCKING STUPID

STOP DISCUSSING THIS

>the christian damage control ITT
My sides, christian god is shit tier
B-but muh theology

>>6544618
>God already makes himself known to those who want to hear him!

Yes, completely subjectively and in a completely untestable fashion

>Because there is no other tenable or more satisfactory explanation for existence to begin with.

But God isn't an explanation for anything. It's not even a hypothesis

>>6544623
he knew it was him because God literally showed up and told him to do it. here have a picture

>>6544635
you do know that, teleogical considerations aside, the faith also had ideas that were legitimately useful to survival and community when it was initially introduced, and sparked a philosophy that influences powerful thinkers to this day.

Your post is the full embodiment of the fedora'd redditor

>>6544623
>So it's completely subjective?
Are you implying feelings are subjective? Not at all. If you want an example, I knew someone once who's uncle one night woke up in the middle of the night and had something inside him telling him to go randomly drive to this area in his town. He wasn't even a guy who really had a relationship with God, though he did somewhat believe, but he could tell it was God talking to him. He felt crazy and ridiculous for doing it, but he did. When he got to this one area (I can't remember specifics but I think it was a bridge), this random guy was standing in the middle of the night by himself, and when he drove by and stopped, he ending up talking to the guy and found out the guy was about to commit suicide, but he ended up stopping him. Again, there are specific times when you're undoubtedly sure, such as that example (I have other examples that were similar from completely different people). But you eventually do get to a point where you are able to distinguish his voice from your own or from anything deceiving you, but it isn't like that right away. It's literally a relationship that grows over time.

>Like committing genocide on Canaanites?
That's an entirely different context for the story that is more difficult to understand from a modern perspective. Did you want me to go into detail on that too because I'm going to be here a while then.

>I specifically asked you how he did this, not that he apparently did it
That's like asking someone, "How do you know you love your spouse?" You just know and if you want it in terms of scientific, physical explanation, you're going to be shit out of luck on not only this but a lot of aspects of life. If you want to experience it first hand, I suggest you try walking down that path a while, because I used to be skeptical as fuck like you, until I really started walking down Catholicism and understanding things that I had so much trouble grasping beforehand.

>>6544654
You type like an absolute moron and apply memes where you should use sound reasoning instead, your post is the full embodiment of the anti-intellectual shitposter.
I never ever said that the Abrahamic faith has no value, it does, you know what else has value?
Alcohol, weed, television.

The clear facts are though, that the Abrahamic faith simply isn't rooted in reality, and that people who do actually believe in them are frankly stupid.

>>6544638
>But God isn't an explanation for anything. It's not even a hypothesis

Explain the existence of our universe without ending up with an unmoved mover.

>>6544638
so we just accept empiricism unquestionably instead of religion?

>>6544654
YES LETS ALL SIT AROUND AND PONTIFICATE ON FIRE AND ALCHEMY BECAUSE THEY WERE THE PRECURSOR TO MODERN SCIENCE AND CHEMISTRY

I AM SURE BEATING A DEAD HORSE IS OF SIGNIFICANT VALUE TO THE WORLD

>>6544668
right back at ya

>>6544623
>Like committing genocide on Canaanites?

Confirmed Dawkins baby.

>>6544678
so you're saying scientism is an absolute answer to morality?

>>6544679
gg no re

>>6544674
Yes because empiricism atleast has a feedback loop, religion and the word of god is final and unchanging. Not really practical for a world that is ever changing.

>>6544635
the fedora has spoken.

>>6544691
Is morality a question

>>6544707
"What is morality?"
"What is moral?"

>>6544678


Hey faggot, what would you say to Lemaitre, Gregor Mendel, Nobel, or John Eccles...all avowed christians who did more to advance science than any New Atheist thinker ever has.

>>6544694
The word of god is examined and changed all the time, just look at the apocrypha or the Council of Nicaea. And let's not forget that science itself tells us that any complex system of logic that we devise will have truth's in it that are unproveable within that logic

>>6544715
Framework for human interaction
What makes you think religion is the only source of morality, or that morality is even absolute?

>>6544732
>Framework for human interaction
>implying feelings of right/wrong aren't inherent
*tips fedora*

>>6544718
Nice modern examples. Not sure what goedel has anything to do with any of this.

>>6544732
what makes you think that science is a source of morality? Or that empiricism tells us all there is to know?

>>6544718
>And let's not forget that science itself tells us that any complex system of logic

Science and Logic are separate fields of knowledge. We use logic as part of science but it is not reliant on science to function. It is categorically separate from science.

This is the problem with New Atheists. They seem to want to lump all knowledge and pursuits of knowledge under this broad, erroneous, and vague blanket understanding of 'science'. When they are confronted with a different field of knowledge, they claim to be part of science. If it doesn't agree with their pre-conceived doctrines, they throw it out the window like a piece of trash. Hence why retards like Dawkins and Hawking ignorantly denounce the whole field of philosophy. It's not because they are above it, it's because they fail to understand it and don't have the intellectual honesty or fortitude to confront it from an unbiased or informed perspective. They do the same with theology and history as well.

In short, they are as dogmatically blind as a evangelical literalist or a member of the Westboro baptist Church.

>>6544739
how is it not modern? It certainly hasn't been disproved

>>6544738
I'd argue it's not "right" and "wrong" but rather a derivative of empathy and sympathy that is inherent

I mean, how would you explain cannibalistic cultures then?

>>6544738
Yes, pretty safe implication

>>6544740
I don't think that at all
It's better than the alternative

>>6544742
>It's not because they are above it, it's because they fail to understand it and don't have the intellectual honesty or fortitude to confront it from an unbiased or informed perspective.

Or it's because the bulk of modern philosophy is untestable horseshit

>>6544742
>this
Besides, if anyone reads that biography of Hawking by his wife, you'll see he has always been an egotistical prick. It's hard to see that now because we only see him giving lectures, but way back in college he was such a little fucker and basically said anything outside of Science is pointless and silly.
>pic related
Not even joking. From the specific stories given, it seems like he acted almost exactly like him

>>6544754
what alternative? just because empirical testing produces repeatable results does not automatically mean it is an answer for everything. you also seem to have no issue resorting to subjective feeling when it suits your ideology

>>6544760
The Root of All Evil is pretty lulworthy

>>6544773
>just because empirical testing produces repeatable results does not automatically mean it is an answer for everything.

Who says it is? That's just your bullshit strawman

>>6544758
>Or it's because the bulk of modern philosophy is untestable horseshit

Nice argument there brah. I now see why I shouldn't listen to those stupid philosophers and only listen to le science mens.

>>6544788
okay fine, but then you still haven put forward any reason to dismiss religious views

>>6544788
not who you're replying to but
>not knowing what a strawman is
>not knowing how scientific studies actually work
I can tell you're not in Uni. Go get educated.

>>6544773
>thinking there can be objectivity when dealing with humans
>thinking humans have some intrinsic moral code instead of us just reacting to situations as the sum of our experiences

>>6544513
disgusting philistine

>>6544792

Tell me, how much of modern philosophy has significantly yielded anything useful? Name one modern theological article that has contributed significantly to something useful, like for instance a new theory of medicine

You can't because theology is useless horseshit that explains absolutely nothing and is nothing more than a semantic circlejerk

>>6544810
>absolutely believing that they don't and then thinking it's ridiculous to absolutely believe they do
retard basement dweller confirmed

yeah, Hitchens can be smug at times. We can cherry pick examples from anyone and make them look bad. Can we post examples of Religious people being arrogant too or will people start posting hat tipping pictures?

>>6544800
the ironing

>>6544797

They're not testable and therefore on the intellectual level of astrology

>>6543730
He clearly said that IF there were such a thing as a second life his children their lives would be the closest to what one could consider a 'second life'.

>>6544800
>>not knowing what a strawman is
>>not knowing how scientific studies actually work

Very well, enlighten me, o wise elder of zion

>>6544814
Before we had the advances and discipline in modern day science, religious philosophy constituted the majority of "medicine", though most of it was preventative admittedly. Why do you think jews can't eat pork or shellfish for example

>>6544814
>Useful is only useful if I believe it is useful
You sound like someone who eats his own shit and loves the taste of it.
>You can't because theology is useless horseshit that explains absolutely nothing and is nothing more than a semantic circlejerk
Holy shit, go read some Thomas Aquinas or St. Augustine and then stop talking. If you seriously think theology is a semantic circlejerk, you are so far from reality that it shows you've never actually looked into it besides rudimentary hearsay.

>>6544738

Go read a book about ethnography or something

>>6544797
I am not against religion, if someone wants to believe in a creator then that is fine by me
Just not specific ones like the christian god. Basically just organised religion

>>6544825
but the anon above me said that it's possible empiricism doesn't explain everything

>>6544837
I could say the same to you. Great argument.

>>6544833
>>Useful is only useful if I believe it is useful

No, useful is when something cures diseases. Useful is when something sends stuff to space. When did theology ever do anything remotely like this?

>Holy shit, go read some Thomas Aquinas or St. Augustine and then stop talking.

I did. It was assertions based on assertions based on claims based on claims.

>you are so far from reality

Oh the fucking irony

>>6544818
i dont get it
can you dumb down your argument for a retard like me

>>6544843

>he thinks that feeling shame or guilt about killing someone is something that will happen because of muh nature.

>he doesn't think that it's just social induced morality

>>6544839
>I am not against religion,
>Basically just organised religion

Nigga are you trying to be retarded. Religion by definition is organized. Any 'unorganized' religion isn't a serious religion at all.

New Atheism on display everybody....

>>6544846
>When did theology ever do anything remotely like this

People followed religion early on because, in addition to spiritual fulfillment, it provided rules of survival

>>6544840
it explains things under a certain system but you can't say for sure that its objectively true or not.

>>6544846
>No, useful is x, y, and z because I believe it's useful. It's completely objective in my mind, how do you not understand? :^)
You seriously are deluded. Philosophy answers why, Science answers how. Please go get educated.
>I did. It was assertions based on assertions based on claims based on claims.
No you didn't, because it starts with actual Platonic thought of reality and builds from there. Good job getting caught in your own lie.
>Oh the fucking irony
Agreed. It's very ironic that you don't understand where I'm coming from yet I completely see where you're coming from.

>>6544852
Fair enough, all religion is shit then
Belief in a creator is not, is what I wanted to say, but I'm sure you got what I meant

>>6544863
Because, again, objectivity is the realm of empiricist. You can't objectively prove everything today and it's possible that you never will

>>6544846
>No, useful is when something cures diseases. Useful is when something sends stuff to space. When did theology ever do anything remotely like this?

Your definition of what is useful is incredibly narrow-minded. By this definition, what is useful about music, or literature, or politics, or art. Furthermore, you can't explain why curing diseases is inherently 'useful' or 'good' without delving into ethics and philosophy--most of which is heavily influenced or derived from theology and theologians.

You haven't even examined the most basic of your claims. Namely, why is anything useful and what is does 'useful' mean? Why should we endeavor to pursue 'useful' ends? The study of teleology alone presents you with philosophical problems you aren't even aware exist and yet great theologians have formed the ethical and teleological framework you so blindly hold allegiance to. In short, you're fucking retarded.

>I did.
No you fucking didn't you mongoloid. And if you did, it was probably a quote in a New Atheist book.

>>6544855
nigga up until the late dark ages peasants bealived in the gods of the forrest and shit like that.

They thought that magic was real and shit ,dont come to me like cristianity was view in the same way it is now bitch nigga there was no code of conduct or ethics involved.

>>6543725
And you are comfortable with what that implies? Seriously?

>>6544118
You know, I always like to think it was Lucifer that came and stopped him, cause it seemed rather odd that god would tell Abraham to kill Issac but sends an angel to tell him not to

>>6544877
>>6544864
Anons, what is the point discussing with a retard? You won't get anywhere.

>>6544881

It made peasants find joy in their suffering through work, it gave meaning to the suffering

>>6544881
yea like peasants had existencial crisis in those times, GTFO.

>>6544888
Cite a source for that.
Nothing personal but I don't believe you.

>>6544906

Have you ever read the bible? It's a fucking manual to accept suffering and *destiny* (which is more suffering and more enslavery)

>>6544888
for you, I bet you have never talked to a person that never went to school
>>6544905

>>6544911
cont.

Shit nigger, just read The Last Messiah from Zapffe and Confession from Tolstoy, all the answers are there (it's just tolstoi went full retard in the end).

>>6544911
you sound like a smug patrician that thinks what the plebs think without ever talked to one in their whole life

>>6544911
But joy in suffering? The bible may be a guide but it doesn't magically make us non-human and I'm having a hard time picturing a midieval peasant being happy in his suffering.

>>6544885
No, I didn't even imply I was you dildo

>>6544923
Okay man, just checking

>>6544922

You don't have to picture a medieval peasant being happy, you just have to look outside and see how everybody is a optimist happy person while they go on their trivial issues. I remember seeing those pleb documentaries where they ask poor-african people if they are happy and they always say yes.

btw I live in a third world country fyi

>>6544928
>implying it matters

God is above human ethics you know

>>6544930
Soooooooo that makes the 'what is good is commanded by god or what is commanded by god is good" question pointless?


>my god can do all this stuff coz he is like ... god!

>>6544960

>Euthyphro problem
>Never read Euthyphro.
>Never read Aquinas

It's like you enjoy displaying your ignorance.

>>6544968
Well those christfags keep posting those threads that starts with that question and that always goes nowhere in the end. Just like this shitty thread

I'm convinced there are like 20 people who just come to this board to argue about politics and pop atheism.

>>6544973
>Well those christfags keep posting those threads that starts with that question and that always goes nowhere in the end

Right. You're blaming the christfags for your shitposting and idiocy. Sounds legit. GTFO.

>>6544986
No dumbass, I am saying that I am shitposting and being idiotic (>implying that i am) in christfags' thread

>>6544194
No he ain't but you sure seem thick

>>6543730

>implying this isn't how the majority of humans have looked at it from time immemorial

Retarded, but there you go.

>>6543725
A real man suffers no tyrants.

>>6544501
please consider your mother suspending my dick

It was completely out of character for Abraham to not haggle with God about that and try to make it so his son only had to squeeze some blood over a goat or something. Only way I can figure it is that Isaac was a brat and he wished he'd cherished Ishmael.

>>6545453
Except of course God exists and he has been the one controlling your life and suffering and always will

>>6545453

Implying you aren't a tyrant to yourself.

i think older hitch is reprehensible, but he's just so addicting and funny i can't hate him. i think he's the best meme on /lit/.

You all are forgiving that it was god himself that gave Isaac to Abraham. So Abraham couldn't have just *doubt* it was god calling for his children. Abraham already knew that God was a fact so he was in a pretty complicated situation.

You guys sure are taking an allegorical story pretty literally

>tfw used to love him
>tfw grow up
>tfw realised he was a fucking idiot

>>6544196
You're misunderstanding.
Abraham had complete faith in god. That means that he knew that whatever happened, the end result would be the best for him since god is all-loving and all-knowing. That's why he went forward with it, because he knew that if god was asking him to do it, it meant that it would work out in the end. And it did, and his relationship with god and his son was strengthened.

>>6546852
Considering how fussy Abraham was about God destroying Sodom and Gomorrah, I think it's more likely Abraham knew God wouldn't make him go through with it, and the two were dicking around with each other.

>>6544183
Perfect and all knowing. God knew what would happen but likes to put us through ordeals like this anyway. *eyes roll out of head*****

>>6544716
Krauss is getting up there

If Jesus is God, by what reason would he feel the need to cry out "Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?" ("My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?")