[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 20 KB, 480x360, 1619424142862.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19069975 No.19069975 [Reply] [Original]

conundrum for christfags on lit...
Presupposition for this post is the fact that no one can prove the existence of God, not even Aquinas, cuz lets be real with ourselves, its the truth

With that fact in mind, if God exists he made us incapable of proving and knowing for sure that he exists.
Second presupposition for this post is that if God exists, the mainstream narrative of catcholic church and the Bible is true. Im gonna close in on the concept of afterlife in which your soul is immortal and you either spend eternity in union with God in heaven or damned forever in suffering in hell based on whether you are saved or not, and only God decides who goes where and people here on earth have their theories but basically good people go to heaven or whatever.
Now, since we cannot prove the existence of God, we can only have faith and human faith is really shaky and inconsistent. Sure, you can train it and force it but imo its not real then, or God can show you signs like he does to minority of people and even then faith of those people is succeptible to doubt.
So, supposing the second presupposition is true, literally nothing in your life matters at all except whether you'll be saved or not.
And when you remember the first presupposition that you cannot prove God's existence, you forget about him. You live day to day, often not thinking about morality of your deeds, which affects the chances of your salvation which is the only important thing in your existence, given the second supposition is true.
Now i would like to make a case that this means that God is unfair, therefore not perfect,
because revealing himself like he did to St. Paul, therefore proving his existence, would literally save anyone and make everyone a best person they can be so they would be saved or atleast maximize the number of souls saved in all of humanity.
Therefore either he doesnt exist at all or my second presupposition is false, the narrative of the church and the bible is not true.

fite me irl fagits

>> No.19070075

>>19069975
Sorry Goku-poster, Abraham-cucks can't think. Next time, maybe. Good effort posting though.

>> No.19070156

>>19069975
No, you're right. Below this post it'll just be a chaos of pure seething and coping but there's really no counter argument to what you said.

>> No.19070167

everyone debating about this stuff has a small mind

>> No.19071589

>>19069975
The reason I believe in a higher power, not a god as humanity could describe it, is the fact that there is anything at all. The possibilities are as follows. Something caused the universe, call that something god. Nothing caused the universe, it is just all effect and no cause, then clearly there is something more than logic at work in our universe, call that god.

>> No.19071672

Seems legit OP so let's start discussing your last line.

God came in the form of jesus to show all of humanity that even a divine being can get fucked over by the universe. If God himself is going to get forsaken by his creator and receive no answer to their prayers (oh father why have you forsaken me?) stop fucking expecting divine intervention in your own lives you puny mortals.

Paul was Antichrist who couldn't cope with this revelation and his followers covered it/downplayed it because they were influential when the church was formed.

And he was influential because his doctrine was popular with the wealthy and allowed hierarchy like that of the Roman empire.

>> No.19071767

>>19069975
Read this.
https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2godforallthings/the-river-of-fire-kalomiros/

>> No.19071800

>>19069975
You ever think that maybe God doesn't want to be proven? That He only reveals Himself to whoever He wants to? That humans have a tendency to be extremely destructive? He came down to earth once and look what happened to Him.

>> No.19071886

>Now, since we cannot prove the existence of God, we can only have faith and human faith is really shaky and inconsistent.

Speak for yourself! Bible points to a multitude of various individuals who had a direct relationship with Him. It even speaks that it is possible with those that have the holy Spirit.

>And when you remember the first presupposition that you cannot prove God's existence, you forget about him.
God won't let you forget Him. Your whole argument speaks exactly like someone who doesn't know anything about God, when the Bible explains a lot of this already. Go read the Bible before making pointless threads like this.

>> No.19071940

>>19069975
"Knowing" God's existence in a propositional sense won't save you, just because someone "saw" God or experienced a miracle it is not like a switch that flipped on and saved that person. The change within someone must come from it's own will to reject sin and voluntarily participate in Gods love in a day to day basis for the rest of his life. While this change might be triggered or not by a mystical experience, the mystical experience on its own is largely irrelevant
>would literally save anyone and make everyone a best person they can be so they would be saved or atleast maximize the number of souls saved in all of humanity.
God is omniscient, he knows what is best for everyone, mystical experiences do more harm than good in most cases, just because you saw God doesn't mean you can't choose to sin or reject him

>> No.19072138

>>19069975
You present a false choice in your presuppositions, that we have to agree to the standards you have set for your argument. You also make several large logical leaps with unfounded basis. For example:
>when you remember the first presupposition that you cannot prove God's existence, you forget about him.
Just because you cannot prove God is true doesn't mean you immediately forget about Him. If that were the case, then according to your own logic, you would not even have been able to create the second presupposition because everybody would have forgotten about the concept of God. Its a non-sequitur, which you follow up with another non-sequitur that claims that God is unfair therefore not perfect.

I also reject your first presupposition. Proof is different to every individual, so to say that the existence of God cannot be proved is not true. Some may have higher or lower standards of proof than others. If objective proof was offered, there would always be those who state that it is not enough.

My argument is simple. The only thing that matters is objective truth.
God either exists or He doesn't; our knowledge of Him is irrelevant to His existence.
In the same way that if I don't know physics, the universe will still operate by its principles, so to can God exist without others knowing him.
Now, I present 1 Corinthians 15:12-19. If Jesus was not raised from the dead, then our faith is in vain. If Jesus' resurrection was false and the basis of our lives, then we are to be pitied for we are leading a life based on a lie.

So yes, I do believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, incarnated Himself in the flesh as Jesus Christ and died for our sins to restore the bond between mankind and Himself. I believe that this is objectively true, and I have my reasons for that. And though my burden of proof may be different from yours, I encourage you to seek for yourself the objective truth.

>> No.19072218
File: 1.13 MB, 997x1280, 11T15__35970.1487355160.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19072218

>>19069975
You have a quite protestant understanding of christianity. The gospel isn't about your personal salvation, it has element of it sure, but fundamentally it's about what God is doing in the world. Salvation is to participate in the life of God, to become in communion with him, become divine. Plus it's interesting that you do admit, that He does show signs to people, yet they still do not have faith in him. Then how does it follow, that revealing himself to a person would change anything? Would a person not assume they were hallusinating? And as for His revelation, St. Paul is struck blind when encountering Him. Coming too close to Him in impurity is serious peril for your mortal existence, which IS something He does care about.
I think your fundamental misunderstanding is to think that the scripture is some kind of divine behaviour manual or an ethical dictionary or something. It is not. Let's suppose that He is real. Then the first thing required of you is worship not moral action. The true revalation of Christ is, that your whole life can be in service to the Lord. Not only that, but in service, it will be better for you and for people around you. And hence "moral" whatever that means anymore.
Sorry if come off a bit cranky. I just woke up and I seriously do not know what people mean by "good" anymore. Only God is good, so without Him, what does the notion rest on?

>> No.19072630

>>19072218
based

>> No.19072654

>>19072218
cringe