|
But see, I don't think it's not my, uh, individualistic atheism that therefore results in myself rejecting objective law. I'm not really sure where the 'individualism' comes into play (as opposed to collectivism, or...?), but you could still conceivably believe in a diety, even an omnipotent and omniscient one, without having to grant it some power to dictate an objective morality. A double-omni-mitt-romney could no more make a morality objective than make 2+2=5. That little challenge to construct a normative argument from descriptive assumptions was basically a reference to hume's is-ought problem. Because, here's the catch, Even if you prove that god is real, and that he's always going to be a self-appointed judge, you can't prove that any agent should morally follow those laws: that following those laws must be good. "God will gently caress you up if you don't follow them", if you could prove that, proves that god has power, but that's not the same as goodness. And I seriously encourage you to try, to try and construct that prescriptive conclusion from descriptive premises, because your failure will be enlightening. I honestly think it should be something everyone tries at least once. You'll see what I mean when I say that goodness cannot exist without a subjectivity. But if you don't believe me then by all means try. Will make good fodder at the very least. Now if you think god presented is a strawman, than that's kind of something that has to be done on a case-by-case basis. Well if that's your experience then so be it, but it's obviously not a universal objection to discussion of god being evil. However I'll totally grant you the possibility of a straw-god in these kind of arguments but, of course, I believe an informed debate is possible. And the objection on apathy: Well I totally grant you than a being whose values are what we would called 'absolute evil', that actively seeks evil, could never be apathetic, but I don't think it's necessary to go that far to call something 'evil', it just has to be worse relative to whatever we hold as the limit of acceptable. So it may value committing what we would call evil in some cases, but not in others. I guess it's more of a question of magnitude, if you want to think of it like that.
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 11:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 18:59 |
|
|
God, as in the Yahweh individual as interpreted and/or believed in by many people, does not technically exist. In this iteration of the universe (of my specific creation) he demonstrably does not exist, although individual lifeforms fulfilling a portion of the description existed in at least the last 2 historic iterations (not to be confused with uncreated timelines, which are among the hardest parts of what I do). The existence of the Christian belief system is a convenience for me, specifically, to achieve a profound understanding through complex self-programming. Now, when I say creation, I really mean I wrote the equation. It's weird. This universe is a lot like the life simulator games where you click some dots and then click "go" and what follows are 100% deterministic self-solving patterns. Morality is an irrelevant concept to the equation. There is no noticeable afterlife, just the same as life isn't noticeable 99.9999999999% of the time since humans are cooperative aggregations of lifeforms operating in tandem and living/dying at wildly erratic intervals. What you define as "life" is closer to the definition of "consciousness," which is entirely linked to what your brain feels. Normal people will not feel death; time will simply stretch for you infinitely in your final moments as the fleshy computer governing your consciousness crashes. I will actually stick around to answer questions. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 11:44
|
|
|
Broken Loose posted:I will actually stick around to answer questions. Thank you. What's your favorite anime?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 11:54
|
|
|
grate deceiver posted:What's your favorite anime? That's actually tough. I have a Macross tattoo, but I really like Ideon and Zeta Gundam a whole lot. A particular individual who assisted in the creation of 2 or 3 iterations of this universe really loved Gaogaigar and tried to imprint some of that show into realspace here. The recursive existence of the show was enough for my taste, and he ended up committing suicide during the beginning of the last hugely divergent creation attempt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 12:01
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Yes. The question being at what point does 'Trolling' become 'LOL, I said something really stupid, look at all those people correcting me legitimately' If a belief system fills the role in your life that religion fills for others, it's a religion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 13:00
|
|
|
Beef Turret posted:If a belief system fills the role in your life that religion fills for others, it's a religion. Which leaves one to conclude that anime is religion, QED.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 13:21
|
|
|
Miltank posted:It blows my mind that Mormons call themselves Christians and people actually buy it. It would be like if Muslims called themselves Mohammed Jews and everyone just went along with it (besides the actual Jews who would be like "wtf?!") Tell me more about smug internet atheists, while you're condescending to other christians about how they're heathens and their religion is stupid because they dont agree with your favorite dogma 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 13:38
|
|
|
Im not condescending to Christians though thats the whole point dude learn to read.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 15:16
|
|
|
Broken Loose posted:God, as in the Yahweh individual as interpreted and/or believed in by many people, does not technically exist. In this iteration of the universe (of my specific creation) he demonstrably does not exist, although individual lifeforms fulfilling a portion of the description existed in at least the last 2 historic iterations (not to be confused with uncreated timelines, which are among the hardest parts of what I do). The existence of the Christian belief system is a convenience for me, specifically, to achieve a profound understanding through complex self-programming. You had an episode, get over it
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Im not condescending to Christians though thats the whole point dude learn to read. I mean, you're really arguing that you get to say whether Mormons are or are not actually Christians. You. You, the arbiter of all that is truly Christian. Not the millions of Mormons who would very much equate their view of Jesus as the true Messiah with being Christian. You.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
I didn't decide that Mormons aren't Christians any more than I decided that the sky is blue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
GAINING WEIGHT... posted:I mean, you're really arguing that you get to say whether Mormons are or are not actually Christians. You. You, the arbiter of all that is truly Christian. Not the millions of Mormons who would very much equate their view of Jesus as the true Messiah with being Christian. You. Religious cladistics ain't easy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
Miltank posted:I didn't decide that Mormons aren't Christians any more than I decided that the sky is blue. And yet you've been arguing exactly that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
quote:A prominent scholarly view is that Mormonism is a form of Christianity, but is distinct enough from traditional Christianity so as to form a new religious tradition, much as Christianity is more than just a sect of Judaism. Presbyterian Church USA posted:The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, like the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), declares allegiance to Jesus. Latter-day Saints and Presbyterians share use of the Bible as scripture, and members of both churches use common theological terms. Nevertheless, Mormonism is a new and emerging religious tradition distinct from the historic apostolic tradition of the Christian Church, of which Presbyterians are a part. ... It is the practice of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to receive on profession of faith those coming directly from a Mormon background and to administer baptism. ... Presbyterian relationships with Latter-day Saints have changed throughout the twentieth century. By God's grace they may change further. Evangelical Lutheran Church in America posted:Although Mormons may use water—and lots of it—and while they may say "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit," their teaching about the nature of God is substantially different from that of orthodox, creedal Christianity. Because the Mormon understanding of the Word of God is not the same as the Christian understanding, it is correct to say that Christian Baptism has not taken place. United Methodist Church posted:The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, by self-definition, does not fit within the bounds of the historic, apostolic tradition of Christian faith. This conclusion is supported by the fact that the LDS Church itself, while calling itself Christian, explicitly professes a distinction and separateness from the ecumenical community and is intentional about clarifying significant differences in doctrine. As United Methodists we agree with their assessment that the LDS Church is not a part of the historic, apostolic tradition of the Christian faith quote:The Episcopal Church (USA), part of the 80-million member Anglican Communion, also does not recognize Mormon baptisms, though it recognizes Christian baptisms that are Trinitarian in nature.. As with the United Methodist Church, the Episcopal Church does not recognize Mormons as historic Apostolic Christians, but rather as a new and unique religious movement that is an offshoot of Christianity. quote:In 2001, in the Roman Catholic Church, the Vatican's Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith decided not to accept Latter-day Saint baptisms as valid.[103] The Catholic Church generally recognizes baptisms from other Christian faiths in the name of the Trinity, provided the person baptized intends to do as the Church intends. However, because of differences in Mormon and Catholic beliefs concerning the Trinity, the Catholic Church stated that Mormon baptism was "not the baptism that Christ instituted." quote:in the past, most mainstream Christian denominations rejected Mormonism outright, frequently calling it a cult and characterizing it as "non-Christian."[89] Although mainstream Christian denominations still reject Mormons as being non-Christian, the image of Mormonism has metamorphosed during the 20th century in large part due to an evolution of Mormon theology and partly due to a deliberate effort on the part of the leadership of the LDS Church.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
In other words, as I said, you're giving in to church lady sect-policing bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 18:26
|
|
|
Mormons are exactly as Christian as Seventh Day Adventists and megachurch denominations.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
Nope. They do not accept the divine nature of Christ, the reject the trinity, and they revere different holy texts. e: Nintendo Kid posted:Mormons are exactly as Christian as Seventh Day Adventists and megachurch denominations. What you are saying only makes sense if you assume that Christianity doesn't actually mean anything. Actual Christians who care about Christianity and the message of the gospels reject Mormonism for what it is- an upstart cult founded by a horny racist. Miltank fucked around with this message at 18:38 on Nov 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:In other words, as I said, you're giving in to church lady sect-policing bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
Guys, Miltank holds his particular cult to be the One True Cult, it's not exactly a novel approach among people of his particular intellectual failing. Do you really need him to expound further?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 18:36
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Nope. They do not accept the divine nature of Christ, the reject the trinity, and they revere different holy texts. So just like Seventh Day Adventists and megachurch ceos, got it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 18:37
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Nope. They do not accept the divine nature of Christ, the reject the trinity, and they revere different holy texts. As opposed to a cult founded by nutritionally deficient, brain damaged, uneducated desert people?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:So just like Seventh Day Adventists and megachurch ceos, got it. I don't know much about Seventh Day Adventists. People like Osteen though, I consider them to be some of the most evil people currently living. They have the traditions and texts of Christianity, but they pervert them and use them for personal gain. They are fully aware and therefore responsible for the evil they commit in ways that other non-Christians are not. Its not just that they are simply unchristian in the way that a Mormon or a Muslim or a Buddhist are, they are something entirely worse- a world of separation is between them. They are a lie shrouded in truth, and I despise them with my every fibre. e:^yes. Miltank fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Nov 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
Who was the first Christian? Sounds like the apostles/jesus wouldn't make your cut which makes sense to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
I don't remember where it was Jesus said "If you're a bad enough person you automatically stop being Christian"? The idea that really awful people can't be Christian totally goes against several basic tenants of Catholicism, whatever Milktank is seems to be incompatible with Christianity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
Sancho posted:Who was the first Christian? Sounds like the apostles/jesus wouldn't make your cut which makes sense to me. Probably Andrew and Simon Peter, why wouldn't the Disciples make the cut? Jesus wasn't a Christian though, you are right. e: it might depend on whether you mean 'Christian' as member of an established Christian religious tradition, or 'Christian' as follower of Christ. Miltank fucked around with this message at 19:17 on Nov 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:09
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:I don't remember where it was Jesus said "If you're a bad enough person you automatically stop being Christian"? The idea that really awful people can't be Christian totally goes against several basic tenants of Catholicism, whatever Milktank is seems to be incompatible with Christianity. I didn't say that Osteen wasn't a Christian per se. I don't deny that he is a member of the Christian tradition, but I don't believe that he is a follower of Christ if that makes sense. Really awful, and even the absolute worst people can be saved, but its not a matter of simply participating in cultural Christianity. Salvation implies repentance and reorientation. Miltank fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Nov 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:16
|
|
|
The Mormons are Christians. Drop it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
You are incorrect. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
Miltank posted:and they revere different holy texts. So are groups that accept/reject certain books in the Apocrypha also "not christians"? What are the "correct" books? How do you know? Mormons feel just as strongly about the book of Mormon as you do about whichever books you trust in, how do you know they are the ones making the mistake and not you? "I just know" or "God told me" are not robust enough answers
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:36
|
|
|
Miltank posted:You are incorrect. Why, because the gang of mainstream religions voted them out of the clubhouse? They are a sect of Christianity. It doesn't matter what you think or what other Churches say. They are Restorationist Christian. Same as thr 7th Day Adventists and others.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
GAINING WEIGHT... posted:"I just know" or "God told me" are not robust enough answers I think it might be worse like "Some super rich guys that came 300 years after Jesus told me so in Nicea" bad. edit: quote:"Resplendent in purple and gold, Constantine made a ceremonial entrance at the opening of the council, probably in early June, but respectfully seated the bishops ahead of himself."[16] As Eusebius described, Constantine "himself proceeded through the midst of the assembly, like some heavenly messenger of God, clothed in raiment which glittered as it were with rays of light, reflecting the glowing radiance of a purple robe, and adorned with the brilliant splendor of gold and precious stones". lmao true Christians there in nicaea. Sancho fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Nov 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
GAINING WEIGHT... posted:So are groups that accept/reject certain books in the Apocrypha also "not christians"? What are the "correct" books? How do you know? Mormons feel just as strongly about the book of Mormon as you do about whichever books you trust in, how do you know they are the ones making the mistake and not you? "I just know" or "God told me" are not robust enough answers The book of Mormon is a completely different type of holy book from the Christian bible and apocrypha. The new testament is a collection of letters and writings by leaders of the early church. The gospels are the transposition of Christian oral traditions about the life of Jesus. The books which make up the new testament were decided on by a council of early Christians before the schism. The book of Mormon on the other hand, was found written on golden plates by Joseph Smith. It is a revealed 'sacred text' which claims to tell truths which the Christian bible misrepresents. Its not just that Christians reject the book of Mormon, Mormons reject aspects of the Christian bible. e: we can talk about the hijacking of Christianity by the Roman state if you would like, but that is a wholly different topic than whether Mormonism is Christianity. Miltank fucked around with this message at 19:56 on Nov 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
Miltank posted:The book of Mormon is a completely different type of holy book from the Christian bible and apocrypha. The new testament is a collection of human letters and writings by leaders of the early church. The gospels are the transposition of Christian oral traditions about the life of Jesus. The books which make up the new testament were decided on by a council of early Christians before the schism. Sounds like simple reformation to me. I'm sure early protestants were thought of as "not Christian" until they became more mainstream. Also you didn't answer my question.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Who wrote the gospels and why were they allowed to? Mark sure as gently caress didn't write the book of Mark and those books showed up decades after Jesus died. Joseph Smith was more in line with the early Christians for writing his own bullshit gospel actually.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:56
|
|
|
Miltank posted:
No, they don't. The BoM is seen as a CONTINUATION of the Bible, and the King James Bible is held with the same regard as the Book of Mormon. So, yeah, where'd you learn about Mormonism? CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Nov 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
Miltank posted:The book of Mormon is a completely different type of holy book from the Christian bible and apocrypha. The new testament is a collection of letters and writings by leaders of the early church. The gospels are the transposition of Christian oral traditions about the life of Jesus. The books which make up the new testament were decided on by a council of early Christians before the schism. "This book written by men is totally different than this book written by men because *farts*"
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
you literally don't know anything about what you are talking about if you think Joseph Smith and Martin Luther did the same thing. If your question is 'why trust one text over the other?' then I don't have nearly the drive to answer that right now. I CAN tell you is that if you put your trust in the Book of Mormon then you are a Mormon and not a Christian.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:No, they don't. The BoM is seen as a CONTINUATION of the Bible, and the King James Bible is held with the same regard as the Book of Mormon.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
Miltank posted:you literally don't know anything about what you are talking about if you think Joseph Smith and Martin Luther did the same thing.  They trust the Bible too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 18:59 |
|
|
Miltank posted:that is what they claim, but the book of Mormon is considered definitive. The BoM is a collection of stories from the lost tribe of Israel that travelled to the new world. Its an addendum. You are bad at Mormonism
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 20:05
|
|