[ 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: 109 KB, 1280x720, 1459798076743.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21512994 No.21512994 [Reply] [Original]

In a godless world of relativity, where everything is meaningless, is obstinately remaining atheist not a faith unto itself? An anti-faith of inversion, a vain devotion to death, to the abyss of the void? If all is meaningless, if all will turn to dust and be forgotten, you might as well believe in God. God is our only hope. There is no virtue in hopelessness, and no virtue at all in anything without God. To not have faith in God is madness.

>> No.21513024

>choosing not to believe something that is only possibly true is madness
wat

>> No.21513064

>>21512994
you have to be at least 18 years old to post on this board

>> No.21513213

>>21512994
>you might as well believe in God.
This attitude is frowned upon
You either believe or you don't

>> No.21513281

>>21512994
lol only Jewish religions even have this concept of “God.” 99% of humans who ever lived got along just fine without it. Meaning comes from the things you do and feel. Only Jews believe in this abstract meaningless concept of “meaning” that for some reason has to be detached from humans and exist independently from them in order to mean anything.

>> No.21514148

>>21513281
gibbering baboon

>> No.21514173

>>21512994
>If all is meaningless, if all will turn to dust and be forgotten, you might as well believe in God. God is our only hope.
Read the Denial of Death this is pretty much his conclusion. Religion is a cope but we need copes. Of course he wrote that before vidya and internet porn.

>> No.21514189

>>21512994
The problem is that authentic faith involves actual belief in the truth of revelation. How are you supposed to fake that?

>> No.21514190

>>21513024
> choosing not to believe in hope even with the possibility of there being none is madness
FIGHT OR DIE DOG

>> No.21514195

>>21514190
He said God, not hope.

>> No.21514198

>>21514195
It was silly of me to assume the literature board would have any level of reading comprehension

>> No.21514200

>>21514198
God and hope are not synonymous. OP is suggesting rolling the dice on hell as well for one thing.

>> No.21514203

>>21513281
Your brain on /pol/

>> No.21514207

>>21514189
Brainwash yourself. Unless you are extremely strong willed going to Mass everyday for a year will leave you believing in God. It's like that Star Trek episode where Picard got brainwashed into saying four lights. That's why it is important to start early with your kids

>> No.21514212

>>21514207
holy shit never breed

>> No.21514222
File: 849 KB, 846x878, 1565357795948.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21514222

Pascal's Wager is easily defeated because it assumes Christianity is the only religion with the potential to be true. It actually requires us to adhere to all religions, just in case they are true- but the mutual exclusivity of most major religions makes this impossible.

>> No.21514226

>>21514195
> God is our only hope
> only hope

on·ly
/ˈōnlē/
Learn to pronounce
adverb
1.
and no one or nothing more besides; solely or exclusively.

>> No.21514230

>>21514226
You are ultimately talking about the concept of God, not the concept of hope.

>> No.21514243

>>21512994
You shouldn't take "atheism" at face value. American kids revolt against their religious parents (Euros are less oppressive) BUT still they remain involved in the parents' discourse, even as opposed to it. It's larping as revolutionaries.

>> No.21514244

>>21513064
this is something an 18 year would post

>> No.21514245

>>21514243
>my opponents beliefs are not as legitimately forged as my own
based and retarded

>> No.21514249

>>21514243
Based. Homos and trannies are fundamentally Christian.

>> No.21514254

>>21514230
He is saying that they are one in the same holy shit. He is saying that without God everything is pointless so the only real source of hope or hope itself is God. Are you being intentionally difficult?

>> No.21514258

>>21514254
I disagree that they are synonymous. We're going to start going in circles here i can feel it.

>> No.21514264

>>21514249
Popes were homos. St Peter Basilica created by homo

>> No.21514265

>>21514254
>He is saying that without God everything is pointless
You mean without Heaven everything is pointless. I want to live forever in a wonderful place. If Heaven didn't exist who would give a shit about God? What would be the point of doing what He said? He's the ticket master not the main event.

>> No.21514266
File: 100 KB, 856x1172, Thomas_Carlyle_lm.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21514266

Say yes.
>On the roaring billows of Time, thou art not engulfed, but borne aloft into the azure of Eternity. Love not Pleasure; love God. This is the EVERLASTING YEA, wherein all contradiction is solved: wherein whoso walks and works, it is well with him.

>> No.21514268

>>21514266
big if true

>> No.21514275

>>21514258
You don't have to fucking agree. I don't agree with him either you fucking idiot. I was just pointing out that your response made a strawman of his argument.

>>21514265
Heaven isn't a place, neither is Hell. In Church teaching Hell is an eternal and self imposed isolation from God. Whereas Heaven is an eternity in God's presence.

>> No.21514277

>>21514275
>self imposed
modern cope

>> No.21514279

>>21514275
>your response made a strawman of his argument.
I disagree.

>> No.21514281

>>21514275
>Heaven isn't a place, neither is Hell.
That's a relief. So Christianity is pretty pointless then?

>> No.21514287

>>21514277
>>21514281
1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him." Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren. To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called "hell."

>> No.21514289

>>21514287
gay shit frfr on god
also didn't read

>> No.21514292

>>21514287
Yeah but what's the point? Not burning forever in Hell is something to pointedly avoid, opposite with seeking Heaven. But neither of them exist so who cares about the rest of the God crap?

>> No.21514293

>>21514287
moderns attempting to cope with the inhumanity of the doctrine of hell which for 99% of christian history was understood not as "self-imposed" but as externall sentenced

>> No.21514298

>>21514287
what i find strange is that dying in a state of mortal sin is a completely arbitrary state of affairs. 100% of catholics are in a state of mortal sin at some point in their lives, in fact many many times in their lives. but this only results in damnation if they happen to die in this state

>> No.21514302

>>21514298
No cap? Imma use this loophole frfr

>> No.21514304

>>21514268
It's really that simple. . . . if you can do it.

>> No.21514306

>>21514298
>completely arbitrary state of affairs
So what? God is morality he can do whatever he wants aka act arbitrarily.

>> No.21514308

>>21514304
big if true

>> No.21514311

>>21514306
dumb christcuck

>> No.21514313

>>21514298
It isn't arbitrary in their eyes. The central teaching of Catholicism revolves around the redemption of sinful humanity through the sacrifice and love of God. So it follows that a person who sincerely ( sincerity being the key here ) repents for their transgressions to God can be brought into union with God.
The fact that a person can die at any moment is also something that is stressed. The church doesn't teach that sinning while you are young is ok because you can always repent later. But that the day and hour is not known and for that reason people must always be ready. Obviously many people unironically use this line of thinking/believing/living, but that isn't representative of the actual doctrine.

>> No.21514315

>>21514306
based

>> No.21514316

>>21514313
>their
y u doin this

>> No.21514324

>>21514222
/thread

>> No.21514327

>>21514324
Well not really because even then it would be better to gamble on one of the mutually exclusive faiths rather than deciding to believe in the void.

>> No.21514336

>>21514327
>Well not really because even then it would be better to gamble on one of the mutually exclusive faiths rather than deciding to believe in the void.
What about the god that has an overwhelming hatred for Pascal's Wager and any abuse of probabilistic reasoning. He sends anyone who takes Pascal's Wager seriously to Hell and only those who laugh at it get into Heaven.

>> No.21514337

>>21514327
Reread the post.

>> No.21514346

>>21514336
You're still believing in a God in that case

>>21514337
You reread it, it doesn't require you to adhere to all religions, that's just anon operating off midwit presuppositions. Even with multiple mutually exclusive faiths it is better to pick one for the tiny chance of being correct vs giving up on the possibility completely and damning yourself certainly ( to the void or hell ).

>> No.21514350

>>21514346
>it doesn't require you to adhere to all religions
It does, implicitly. By mistake. But it does.

>> No.21514353

>>21514346
>You're still believing in a God in that case
No you aren't, all the anti-Pascal God requires is not believing in Pascal's Wager. Gambling on one of the mutually exclusive faiths with Pascal's would get you sent to Hell even if you pick the anti-Pascal God. The possible existence a-PG makes taking PW illogical.

>> No.21514356

>>21514353
lmfao good shit

>> No.21514364

>>21514353
That doesn’t fit any definition of God, secular or religious. You could just as likely say what if God is a big dumb meanie and nothing we do will please him. But that’s you putting arbitrary limits on the concept of God.

>> No.21514365

>>21512994
By relativity, do you mean relativism?

>> No.21514366

>>21514364
midwit post, unironically (without irony;;;;;;frfr).

>> No.21514372

>>21514364
>That doesn’t fit any definition of God, secular or religious.
I just made it up. The point is that it is a possible god.
>But that’s you putting arbitrary limits on the concept of God.
Huh? You're the one putting arbitrary limits by saying my possible God can't exist.

>> No.21514374

>>21514372
It is not a contradiction nor is it limiting to state that God has no limits.

>> No.21514379

>>21514374
>It is not a contradiction nor is it limiting to state that God has no limits.
So my anti-Pascal God can exist then?

>> No.21514383

>>21514379
No, because your anti Pascal God is defined within a very strict boundary. You are suggesting a God that is limited, whereas God is defined by the absence of boundaries, not a boundary.

>> No.21514391

>>21514383
>No, because your anti Pascal God is defined within a very strict boundary.
So this surely means Christianity is false then right? Because there are very strict boundaries on what the Christian God likes and doesn't like. My anti-Pascal God has only one boundary. He hates Pascal's Wager

>> No.21514398

>>21514391
The God of Christianity has no limits. Once again, a lack of boundaries is not a boundary. The God of Christianity could arbitrarily decide to send any sinner to heaven if God so wanted. That is in line with church teaching, it really would be much more productive if you understood what you were attacking a little better.

>> No.21514409

>>21514346
>>21514350
I accept your concession.

>> No.21514413

>>21514398
>The God of Christianity has no limits. Once again, a lack of boundaries is not a boundary.
You say that my anti-Pascal God sending someone to hell for believing in Pascal's Wager is a limit. So how does the Christian God sending someone to hell for not believing in Him not also a limit? You're being incoherent. Either they're both limits or they're not

>> No.21514423

>>21514413
>So how does the Christian God sending someone to hell for not believing in Him not also a limit?
Once again you operate off your own midwit presupposition. Yes. You creating a God that says if you do X then you get Y is a limit on God. What you just wrote that I quoted above isn't a limit, you're stating that God sends a person to hell. I think you meant to write that you believe that the Christian God sends all people who do X to hell. Which is not what the church teaches, because once again, the church teaches that God is limitless.

>> No.21514427

>>21514364
>That doesn’t fit any definition of God, secular or religious.
People have made up new religions throughout history. Why is this guy's God not allowed?

>> No.21514433

>>21514427
Because he is limited in his capacity, ergo he is not a God. The " Gods " pantheistic religions are not God in the sense of the way that we understand the word. They are more like Deities. Beings above humans but are not omnipotent/are limited in some capacity. To give you a modern analogy. It's like our society calling tranny women men because they redefined what " man " means.

>> No.21514434

>>21514423
>I think you meant to write that you believe that the Christian God sends all people who do X to hell. Which is not what the church teaches, because once again, the church teaches that God is limitless.
I mean you're right I did think that the church taught that if you don't believe in God you go to Hell. So as an atheist I'm going to Heaven then? Or at least I have the same chance as a Christian since it comes down to an arbitrary action by a limitless God. This seems like an anti-Pascal Wager on it's own, believing in God is pointless because God has no limits on his decisions concerning who gets into heaven.

>> No.21514444

>>21514433
But we were speaking of all Religions, some of whom do not define their gods as you claim.
Since you're just saying "those aren't real Gods", you reveal your bad faith.

>> No.21514460

>>21514434
>So as an atheist I'm going to Heaven then? Or at least I have the same chance as a Christian since it comes down to an arbitrary action by a limitless God
Nah, if you want a sincere and somewhat concise answer to a very complicated topic I will try. Church teaching states that God gave us a set of guidelines to live by. If we adhere to these guidelines AND cultivate a relationship with God then you can be with God for eternity. This doesn't in turn mean that a person who doesn't or hasn't had the chance to do this won't be saved by God, as God is free to act however he sees fit. Choosing to be an athiest most likely damns you to an eternity in Hell ( once again, not fire, but a state of eternal isolation away from God ) but at the end of the day no human passes judgement. God does, and he has the power to do whatever he sees fit or judge in whatever manner he deems just.
Hopefully that addresses all your points.

>> No.21514463

>>21514444
No. I am saying that what they defined as Gods is not the same concept as what Abrahamic religions define as God. You misunderstand what I am saying.

>> No.21514468

>>21514460
>Church teaching states that God gave us a set of guidelines to live by. If we adhere to these guidelines AND cultivate a relationship with God then you can be with God for eternity
But this is just a limit on the Christian God just like my anti-Pascal God saying if you believe in Pascal's wager you go to hell. You can't have it both ways. Either a set of guidelines is a limit or it isn't. My anti-Pascal God only has one guideline, don't believe in Pascal's Wager

>> No.21514469

>>21512994
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introspection_illusion

Stop proselytizing

>> No.21514479

>>21514468
1. God says do x for y
2. God says do not do z for y =/= God literally cannot give y to those who do z

>> No.21514482

>>21514463
Pascal's wager applies to every religion though. Not just ones that worship the God of Abraham.

>> No.21514484

>>21514471
>>21514482
Ok? Do you retards think im a proponent of Pascal's wager?

>> No.21514485

>>21514479
Both limits on what the respective Gods can do. You're claiming that God can't send someone to Hell
>If we adhere to these guidelines AND cultivate a relationship with God
If that's not a limit then why is my anti-Pascal God saying if you believe in Pascal's wager you go to hell a limit?

>> No.21514487

>>21514484
Certainly seems like it. But if you lie and say you aren't that'd be nice too, I'm trying to go to bed.

>> No.21514492

>>21514484
You're this guy >>21514327 right? What you wrote there is wrong as shown by my possible anti-Pascal God. Gambling on one of them would be no better than deciding to believe in the void.

>> No.21514507

>>21512994
Bad news OP. The universe is ruled by the Nihilism God and they frown upon your self-serving attempt at finding meaning in a higher power. The Nihilism God will damn you to an eternal cycle of reincarnation as a cockroach whereas the non-believing skeptics have been rewarded for finding purity in hopelessness and now live forever in paradise.

>> No.21514510

>>21514485
Because the church doesn't view God as a robotic AI that is hardcoded to respond in a predetermined way based on the inputs of humans. I have spent paragraphs attempting to explain to you what omnipotence means yet you still seem to view it as a series of inputs and outputs for whatever reason.
>>21514485
>If that's not a limit then why is my anti-Pascal God saying if you believe in Pascal's wager you go to hell a limit?
Because that isn't what you said. You said
>. He sends anyone who takes Pascal's Wager seriously to Hell and only those who laugh at it get into Heaven.
so see above.

>>21514492
See above, Pascal's wager is retarded.

>> No.21514524

>>21513281
I'm an atheist but it's funny because 'meaning' is all located in the brain. If you get a bad concussion or head trauma, your brain can turn off the meaning and you will see everything as meaningless
It's funny how everyone takes it for granted. You would be horrified honestly

>> No.21514526
File: 269 KB, 500x507, 20201108_202655.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21514526

>>21514510
>Pascal's wager is retarded.
But you're this guy
>>21514346

Why would you waste time defending something retarded? That would make you retarded.

>> No.21514528

>>21514510
>Because that isn't what you said
Saying you go to hell and sending you to hell are synonymous in my mind. If want to differentiate between them we're just back to here >>21514434 since if the Christian God saying you go to Heaven is not the same as the Christian God sending you to Heaven then Christians and atheists are in the same boat in regards to where they're going.

> I have spent paragraphs attempting to explain to you what omnipotence means yet you still seem to view it as a series of inputs and outputs for whatever reason.
I specifically pointed out the problem with God not being "limited" here >>21514434. You didn't like that and tried to wriggle out and wound right back in the limited God paradigm.

>> No.21514531

>>21514526
Because misrepresenting retarded arguments just makes everyone who reads it even dumber and misinformed. I am against the further retardation of lit, I will pray for you anon.

>> No.21514534

>>21514531
Yeah no. That's the worst save attempt I've seen in a while.
I accept your concession.

>> No.21514538

>>21514528
Is this really such a difficult concept to grasp? . God said follow these guidelines to be saved. He did not say follow these guidelines or I will be incapable of doing anything to save you or redeem you. That does not mean that he won't follow through with his word, just that the possibility of arbitrarily changing his mind is within his limitless power.
You are the one making the leap that if God can save unrepentant sinners that must mean that you have the same chance as someone who devoutly follows God or that you have a chance at all. I am not saying you have a chance. I am saying God has the possibility.

>> No.21514546

>>21514524
And yet someone could suffer the very same concussion and persist

>> No.21514548

>>21514538
>Is this really such a difficult concept to grasp? . God said follow these guidelines to be saved. He did not say follow these guidelines or I will be incapable of doing anything to save you or redeem you.
You're intentionally avoiding the limit that I've pointed out several times and keep returning to the possibility of God potentially saving people who don't follow his guidelines. What about God damning people that do follow his guidelines? I've asked this several times and you keep dodging it. Is God "limited" in his ability to damn sincerely practicing Christians to Hell and if not what is the point of being a Christian instead of an atheist?

>> No.21514551

>>21514538
What about a Limitless Pascal God, who reserves its judgement but judges those taking the Pascal Wager by happenchance rather than rule.

>> No.21514554

>>21514548
What fucking limit. >>21514548
>What about God damning people that do follow his guidelines?
Is this supposed to be a " gotcha ". Yes you fucking retard, omnipotence means that God can damn those who follow his word. That is within his power/ability, but it does not mean that he does. Holy fucking shit you room temperature IQ. Please look up the meaning of omnipotence in a fucking dictionary, and be satisfied that every answer to one of your stupid fucking questions is " yes God can ", can=/=does.

>> No.21514559

>>21514554
Did you even read >>21514434? You've admitted that being a Christian has no impact on whether you go to Heaven or not so what is the point of being a Christian or an atheist? By claiming God is "limitless" to defend an argument you yourself said is stupid you've managed to render Christianity totally pointless since a "limitless" God doesn't follow any guidelines.

>> No.21514560

>>21514551
Your statement is paradoxical. You call this God limitless but then write
> who reserves its judgement but judges those taking the Pascal Wager by happenchance rather than rule.
You are falling into the same materialistic input output model. See >>21514510 .

>> No.21514565

>>21514560
So the Christian God doesn't judge lol? You're digging yourself deeper and deeper

>> No.21514567
File: 20 KB, 480x360, 21784781248712784.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21514567

>>21514559
>You've admitted that being a Christian has no impact on whether you go to Heaven or not so what is the point of being a Christian or an atheist?

>> No.21514570

>>21514565
>>>21514548
>What fucking limit. >>21514548
>>What about God damning people that do follow his guidelines?
>Is this supposed to be a " gotcha ". Yes you fucking retard, omnipotence means that God can damn those who follow his word. That is within his power/ability, but it does not mean that he does. Holy fucking shit you room temperature IQ. Please look up the meaning of omnipotence in a fucking dictionary, and be satisfied that every answer to one of your stupid fucking questions is " yes God can ", can=/=does.

I am legitimately stunned by dogshit level of reading comprehension here. Stunned, you fucking retards wouldn't even understand The Communist Manifesto

>> No.21514571

>>21514567

>>21514538
>He did not say follow these guidelines or I will be incapable of doing anything to save you or redeem you.

>>21514554
>Yes you fucking retard, omnipotence means that God can damn those who follow his word.

Man it's what you said.

>> No.21514573

>>21514571
>>21514571
>>>21514565
>>>>21514548
>>What fucking limit. >>21514548
>>>What about God damning people that do follow his guidelines?
>>Is this supposed to be a " gotcha ". Yes you fucking retard, omnipotence means that God can damn those who follow his word. That is within his power/ability, but it does not mean that he does. Holy fucking shit you room temperature IQ. Please look up the meaning of omnipotence in a fucking dictionary, and be satisfied that every answer to one of your stupid fucking questions is " yes God can ", can=/=does.
>I am legitimately stunned by dogshit level of reading comprehension here. Stunned, you fucking retards wouldn't even understand The Communist Manifesto

>> No.21514576

>>21514573
Bro you tried to defend an argument that you later said was stupid and then managed to destroy the relevance of your own religion. I don't think you should be pointing any fingers. Christian theology is for retards that wouldn't pass an undergrad logic course

>> No.21514580

>>21514576
I stated that God has the possibility to do anything. You are the retard who made the unsupported jump that God being able to redeem nonbelievers means that nonbelievers will be saved and there is no point in being religious because an athiest has just as good of a chance. Your inability to understand potential and action. Or maybe it is your inability to read. Talking about passing a logic course after writing all that lmao.

>> No.21514586

>>21514560
What's hardcoded about it, if it ultimately judges based on its divine whim as the Christian God does

>> No.21514593

>>21514580
>You are the retard who made the unsupported jump that God being able to redeem nonbelievers
and damn sincere practicing believers remember you admitted to that too.

If I told you that you had to get some repair done to your car to fix something that may work itself out and that the fix may not actually work wouldn't I be justified in asking why should I bother with the repair? Are you arguing it's a probability thing? Then just make my anti-Pascal God probably damn you to Hell presto no "limits" on my God.

>> No.21514599
File: 1.98 MB, 2400x1594, C839C17E-AEFB-455B-AED2-D546B06C02EA.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21514599

>>21514593
>and damn sincere practicing believers remember you admitted to that too
Yes. You fucking retard. That’s what omnipotence means, potential and action.
I am done with this, you can reread my replies to any new ways you decide to post the same questions already answered in this thread. I am glad we had this discussion however so that for the next few days anons can read this thread and laugh at the 80 IQ Evola fanboys in this thread.

>> No.21514606

>>21514599
Why can't taking the Pascal's Wager be equivalent to sin.

>> No.21514607

>>21512994
> In a godless world of relativity, where everything is meaningless, is obstinately remaining atheist not a faith unto itself?
No inherent/absolute meaning =/= meaningless you retarded tranime christcuck

>> No.21514612

>>21514599
You've given no reason that Christianity has more point to it than atheism since in your own words being a good Christian doesn't guarantee entry into Heaven and again in your own words being an atheist doesn't guarantee you go to Hell.

Returning to the initial argument you've also failed to show how the guidelines given by the Christian God differ in any way from the guidelines given by my anti-Pascal God in terms of them being referred to as "limits". You gave a dumb an argument and defended it with an even dumber one.

>> No.21514618

>>21514612
>You've given no reason that Christianity has more point to it than atheism since in your own words being a good Christian doesn't guarantee entry into Heaven and again in your own words being an atheist doesn't guarantee you go to Hell.
Nigga you wrote all this bullshit when you could have just googled what Omnipotence means and saved yourself the embarrassment

>> No.21514623

>>21514618
>Nigga you wrote all this bullshit when you could have just googled what Omnipotence means and saved yourself the embarrassment
I'm sure alot of Christians would be surprised to know that omnipotence makes Christianity pointless compared to atheism.

>> No.21514640

>>21514623
Well no, because it relies on the logical leap you made yourself. I wouldn’t make logic leaps if I were you, considering you have a hard time grasping concepts like possibility vs action maybe you’d be better off spending your days making macaroni pictures to give to your mom when she brings you down tendies.

>> No.21514648

>>21514640
>Well no, because it relies on the logical leap you made yourself.
What logical leap? As I said here >>21514593
>Are you arguing it's a probability thing? Then just make my anti-Pascal God probably damn you to Hell presto no "limits" on my God.
Are you saying it's more probable that the Christian God will send you to heaven if you follow his guidelines? How is this probability distribution not a "limit" on God and even if it's not I'll just have my anti-Pascal God probably send you to Hell for believing in Pascal's Wager and thereby avoid any "limits".

>> No.21514654

>>21514640
Here I'll give you in an example:
If you worship me you may or may not get into heaven and if you don't worship me you may or may not go to hell. Wouldn't it be reasonable to ask what the point of worshiping me was?

>> No.21514660

>>21514648
> potential vs action
> can =/= will

Goodnight anon. If you leave me an address I will send you an English dictionary so you can learn what certain words mean.

>> No.21514665

>>21514660
Are you hung up on the omnipotence thing? Call my anti-Pascal God omnipotent if it makes you feel better. He CAN send you to Heaven even if you believe in Pascal's Wager but he WON'T. So he is limitless just like the Christian God

>> No.21514672

>>21512994
>is obstinately remaining atheist not a faith unto itself?

No.

>you might as well believe in God. God is our only hope.

???????????

>no virtue at all in anything without God.

Worshipping a desert demon who killed scores of people because they begged for meat is supposed to be virtuous?

>> No.21514687

>>21512994
We don't live in a godless world of relativity. God exists because God has remained and will forever remain silent.
I'm pretty certain the ancient pantheons and the gods thereof are also real. Then there are modern gods, and gods inbetween. There truly are gods in everything.

>> No.21514705

>>21512994
you have to be at least 18 years old to post on this board
>>21513281
Lol this. Abrahamic 'religions' are ersatz religious systems that were created to destroy authentic traditions and control populations. Basically larping.

>> No.21514710

>>21512994
your god is anime not Christ retard tranime cultist

>> No.21515243

>>21514607
>No inherent/absolute meaning =/= meaningless
How is it not, ultimately? If there's no absolute truth to aspire to, then everything is nonsense. If the cosmos has no memory, things that pass might as well have never existed at all.

>> No.21515621

>see low-IQ bait thread with 4 replies
>go to sleep
>wake up
>thread has over 100 replies
/lit/ falls for the shittiest bait

>> No.21516943

>>21514365
Yes, thank you.
>>21515621
I do have a relatively low IQ, which is why I wanted to see if some people smarter than me can correct my line of thought. There were some pretending that relativism somehow doesn't inevitably lead to nihilism, but no real refutation. Believing in nihilism is insane, because if nothing means anything, then neither does what you happen to believe. The only real shelter/cope against nihilism is to have faith in God. And by God, I don't mean "a god", I mean the ultimate, eternal, infinite, omniscient, transcendent, all-powerful being, the unknowable uncreated creator, the source of absolute truth and beauty, etc. I don't see a reason to put too much faith into any particular teachings (clearly we live in an imperfect world and our aspirations to come to know God are all also imperfect), but not believing in the absolute in some form must be either insanity or a failure to truly appreciate the horror of a godless world.

>> No.21516991

>>21516943
>I do have a relatively low IQ
We could tell.

>> No.21517007
File: 22 KB, 500x361, 1535315017694.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21517007

>>21514660
>>21514665
Starting to notice an increasing amount of religitards just give up and leave when they lose an argument recently.
It's the forum equivalent of your entire belief system- running away from the truth.

>> No.21517014

>>21516991
I know. What was the biggest tell? I'm trying to get better at pretending to be smart, maybe you can help.

>> No.21517019

>>21517014
The biggest tell was that you read Pascal's Wager and thought it made sense.

>> No.21517047
File: 1.31 MB, 3250x4000, 1661618874380560.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21517047

>>21512994
To have faith in a God you can only hope exists, in a God we literally created, that is madness. But I can see your point Anon, I also understand your logic, alas God is but a mere creation of man - an imperfect lie told to ourselves by ourselves to keep us warm in the dark. I believe in agnosticism, I believe in an ever so neutral God, nothing else could explain the destruction of this beautiful planet and the situation of pure disgust it has found itself in. How do I cope with reality? I don't. I find no need to cope with the abyss, if I am then I am not dead and needn't fear it. If I am dead then I needn't fear it, for I won't be there to fear it.
Simple as.

>> No.21517055

>>21517047
>If I am dead then I needn't fear it, for I won't be there to fear it.
>Simple as.
based
Death is the same as the time before you were born.

>> No.21517072

>>21517047
>if I am then I am not dead and needn't fear it. If I am dead then I needn't fear it, for I won't be there to fear it.
This is also a cope

>> No.21517074

>>21517072
cope doesn't exist in the void

>> No.21517154

>>21517072
Then what would not be cope?

>> No.21517159

>>21517154
Voting for The Donald.

>> No.21517232

>>21512994
>In a godless world of relativity, where everything is meaningless, is obstinately remaining atheist not a faith unto itself?
Correct. But this is only because the distinction between theist and atheist is an extension of binary Christian logic - saved or damned, belief or non-belief. Atheists are still trapped in a religious framework. To truly embody the godless world of relativity, there should be no reason why I have to make a choice at all. There is nothing stopping my god from being more real and powerful than yours, regardless of which is the “true” one. pantheism would reign free, but one in which UNbelief is king, that is to say, the unilateral suspension of certainty in any one true god. Rather, gods would compete as manifestations on earth through the community of believers that enact the reality of their god through their words and deeds. Whichever religion wills their god most forcefully shall have the nearest claim to true divinity, but even then their platform is constantly threatened by competing faiths. This would ensure that all faiths are able to coexist without the risk of each group attempting to enforce total dogmatic submission on their followers.

>> No.21517513

>>21512994
gibberish

>> No.21517682

>>21517232
>There is nothing stopping my god from being more real and powerful than yours, regardless of which is the “true” one. pantheism would reign free, but one in which UNbelief is king, that is to say, the unilateral suspension of certainty in any one true god.
The ultimate being of infinity, the true creator, there's no mistaking that dude for anyone else, knowhamsayin? He's kinda singular, by definition.

>> No.21518462

>>21517154
sitting down and contemplating the abyss until you have a psychotic break and/or become enlightened

>> No.21518468

>>21518462
>he hasn't done this by age 9
ngmi

>> No.21520031

>>21517019
why doesn't it make sense