|
SedanChair posted:Oh it happened. It happened a bunch of times. But the Lord wasn't crucified. A bunch of powerless men, women and children were crucified, and instead of taking the Master's real message that the low is high, the church spent centuries trying to make the one man the highest and keep the low, low. The real message is here with us, the humanists. Jesus isn't in Christianity, he's in our shiny new code of ethics. Then we should put him back in Christianity! But you aren't wrong about Christianity, it is on both sides of the cross. Christians should do something about that! It's very hard for that happen if one ceases to be Christian. SedanChair posted:Things matter, Brandor. In the general sense yes of course they do, but unfortunately (unless something changes) it's also unknowable. CommieGIR posted:Its a distraction. Please explain justification for God's actions towards Job. Maybe the movie has something to do with the utter futility of theodicy and ineffableness of evil? What then? Kyrie eleison posted:Do not try to prove the existence of the deity, or claim that belief in him is rational, or empirical. One interacts with Him only through the spiritual. Any other attempt at discovering him borders on blasphemy. His presence is observed through spiritual experience, and is obvious to people whose hearts are open to the spiritual. Those who do not experience the deity have had their hearts hardened by Him, and should pray that he reveal Himself to them. Bordering on origenist there. Which I think is a good thing that you might not think is a good thing. Captain_Maclaine posted:It's no accident that Brandor has been as active as he has in that thread. It's not, I basically have the same thing to say there, and here, and had the same thing to in the math is real thread. Unrelated: I didn't get a chance to say it in the Lib thread, but Caros I think the story you told about your personal experience with Libertarianism is what needs to be done.
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 01:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 01:21 |
|
|
DrProsek posted:But you claim God will never let any of them out of Hell. Are you a prophet? Because the only way you could know God will never forgive a person is if you have spoken to God and he told you, or are yourself God. Everyone seems very confused on this. Hell is the state of having rejected God. Tautologically: one cannot achieve Heaven and be united with God if one has rejected God. We cannot say whether any person has rejected God - we are not God and cannot sit in judgement. But we can say that if such a person existed, they would not be united with God, through their own free will.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
It just seems very strange to me that Kyrie keeps trying to put limits on God's limitless mercy. If you have hubris, God will for sure send you to Hell, he can't forgive you no matter what possibly mitigating factors might exist that Something Awful user Kyrie Elison can't see. If you go to Hell, God can not let you out because KE doesn't see a way for God to do that. KE seems to speak on God's behalf a whole lot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 01:49
|
|
SedanChair posted:If that is so, would you be disclaiming the mainstream Christian position that people of reason and decency can be counted on to arrive at belief in God? It seems like only one of these ideas could be true. Yes, and that's only the Catholic position. VitalSigns posted:Why. Plenty of people saw Jesus' miracles and they didn't all worship him. "Worship" in the sense of acknowledging divine responsibility for these things.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 01:49
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:It just seems very strange to me that Kyrie keeps trying to put limits on God's limitless mercy. If you have hubris, God will for sure send you to Hell, he can't forgive you no matter what possibly mitigating factors might exist that Something Awful user Kyrie Elison can't see. If you go to Hell, God can not let you out because KE doesn't see a way for God to do that. KE seems to speak on God's behalf a whole lot. Hell means the choice of having rejected God. It's a tautology. If I have rejected God, God cannot "let me out": I have chosen this myself. No-one is speaking on behalf of God.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:But you claim God will never let any of them out of Hell. Are you a prophet? Because the only way you could know God will never forgive a person is if you have spoken to God and he told you, or are yourself God. CCC 393
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
Cavaradossi posted:Hell means the choice of having rejected God. It's a tautology. If I have rejected God, God cannot "let me out": I have chosen this myself. No-one is speaking on behalf of God. I thought God was sovereign and He decides who receives grace and whose heart is hardened. Now you're telling me that I, a puny mortal, can thwart the will of God and refuse to be let out of Hell even if God so desires?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I thought God was sovereign and He decides who receives grace and whose heart is hardened. Yes, you have free will, and you can use it to reject God.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 01:57
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I thought God was sovereign and He decides who receives grace and whose heart is hardened. The heights of argument built on a figure of speech are astounding. I guess that when the maltheism argument moves on, we'll then have the saw about how God is weak to cars?
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:The heights of argument built on a figure of speech are astounding. I guess that when the maltheism argument moves on, we'll then have the saw about how God is weak to cars? But Kyrie literally said the opposite earlier Kyrie eleison posted:There are those who show great determination, who willingly suffer Hell, and try to convince others to suffer Hell with them, in their spite for God, though they know they can never defeat Him. They are called Satan and his angels. Maybe God should rethink this whole "be really-super-vague and never give anyone enough evidence to say which theology or hell even which religion is right" thing because it appears to be causing problems with people figuring out how to get saved.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:02
|
|
|
It's really quite sad how hard you scramble to keep the ever-weakening pile of scraps you call a belief-system afloat. You already know that you follow a pile of lies towards hell, all that's left is to shuck them and turn towards the truth.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
I realize this is a rather bush league argument that you've all heard before, but why is a state of permanent separation from God so unbearable? We've already established that God can behave towards us in a way that, were he a man, would make him a scumbag. It seems like purely a matter of "hell is unbearable because I say it is."
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:But Kyrie literally said the opposite earlier No - Satan and his angels are not people (humans). They have no earthly nature. Satan has rejected God, and is therefore (tautology) in Hell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I realize this is a rather bush league argument that you've all heard before, but why is a state of permanent separation from God so unbearable? We've already established that God can behave towards us in a way that, were he a man, would make him a scumbag. It seems like purely a matter of "hell is unbearable because I say it is." Because God is Love.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
Cavaradossi posted:Because God is Love. Gay love too?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Gay love too? Agape, not eros.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
Cavaradossi posted:Agape, not eros.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Is it possible to experience this emotion without the direct involvement of God? Yes, it is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
Cavaradossi posted:Agape, not eros. Yeah, I'll take hell then, thanks. Bring on the eros.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Yes, it is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
Nessus posted:So it seems as if Hell is not receiving some benefit, rather than being subjected to eternal torment. God not providing everyone with equal post-mortem rewards (but not condemning people to eternal physical agony because reasons) is actually a lot easier for me to get my head around! No, god condemning his creations for petty things is a lot more difficult to get my head around. God flooding the world because his creations didn't do what he wanted is difficult to get my head around. But since nobody can know god, and the only proof that god exists is a book created by men for the benefit of men, I feel pretty safe in knowing there's probably no such thing as god or hell. And considering some of humanities greatest thinkers are destined for hell or at least purgatory, I think that would probably be the better place to go anyways. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 02:35 on Dec 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Okay, so if God, El-Shaddai, YHVH, etc. made his presence known, everyone would acknowledge his existence. You see why this is compelling worship? Faith (outside of trust in the senses) is impossible when something is a routine matter of physical reality. An entity that values people placing trust in him would lose much of that trust if his existence were undeniable. Everyone acknowledges the color blue, but I don't see very many people worshipping it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:33
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:Everyone acknowledges the color blue, but I don't see very many people worshipping it. Acknowledging that God is who he says he is is, generally, worshiping him. Unless you take a position that is distinct from the maltheism on display and probably has never been really articulated, you can't help but worship him in the sense provided by the New Testament.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Acknowledging that God is who he says he is is, generally, worshiping him. Unless you take a position that is distinct from the maltheism on display and probably has never been really articulated, you can't help but worship him in the sense provided by the New Testament. Everyone acknowledges, as well, that Barack Obama exists, but tremendous numbers of them disagree with what he says he is. It is entirely within the capacity of humans to disbelieve obvious facts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Acknowledging that God is who he says he is is, generally, worshiping him. He said he was a bitch though? I mean, so needy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:40
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:Everyone acknowledges, as well, that Barack Obama exists, but tremendous numbers of them disagree with what he says he is. It is entirely within the capacity of humans to disbelieve obvious facts. OK, but again, this is in the context of why doesn't Jesus provide proof or at least strong evidence for his existence as the creator of the universe.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:41
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Acknowledging that God is who he says he is is, generally, worshiping him. Unless you take a position that is distinct from the maltheism on display and probably has never been really articulated, you can't help but worship him in the sense provided by the New Testament. But tons of people in the Bible did exactly what you're saying is impossible here. Like they saw God, watched Him gently caress up a bunch of Egyptians, and were worshiping something else by late afternoon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:OK, but again, this is in the context of why doesn't Jesus provide proof or at least strong evidence for his existence as the creator of the universe. ...Yeah, I understand. There's strong evidence for evolution, or the big bang, or that vaccines don't cause autism, or that global warming is caused by humans, and yet! Providing evidence for a thing is not "compelling" anyone to believe in it, as is demonstrated constantly all over the world, and it's bizarre to me that you think it is. If seeing something and believing in it isn't Good Enough Faith, then are the Apostles rotting in hell because it's impossible for them to have faith in that which they personally witness? This is just a ridiculous train of logic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 02:45
|
|
VitalSigns posted:But tons of people in the Bible did exactly what you're saying is impossible here. No, they didn't. The Golden Calf is an idol representing God in East Semitic style as a bull. The Bronze Serpent isn't considered an idol until centuries after its use. Exodus is also metaphorical and not very historical. The worship of Phoenician and Philistine deities was performed by people who thought of YHVH as just one god among many, and who had no direct experience with the divine. Nobody actually has any proof of God as the creator of the universe except on his say-so in the Bible. Muscle Tracer posted:...Yeah, I understand. There's strong evidence for evolution, or the big bang, or that vaccines don't cause autism, or that global warming is caused by humans, and yet! Providing evidence for a thing is not "compelling" anyone to believe in it, as is demonstrated constantly all over the world, and it's bizarre to me that you think it is. Those sorts of beliefs are of course all well-respected. Especially the ones where people can directly experience them to be true. Like, if people did in fact experience incontrovertible proof that YHVH did create the heavens and the Earth, they would have to be insane to refuse to acknowledge YHVH as creator. Those beliefs can thrive because people do not observe them happening, nor is the evidence as arbitrarily incontrovertible as YHVH could make it.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:No, they didn't. The Golden Calf is an idol representing God in East Semitic style as a bull. The Bronze Serpent isn't considered an idol until centuries after its use. Exodus is also metaphorical and not very historical. The worship of Phoenician and Philistine deities was performed by people who thought of YHVH as just one god among many, and who had no direct experience with the divine. Nobody actually has any proof of God as the creator of the universe except on his say-so in the Bible. The bible which, by your own admission here, is unreliable as all gently caress. Parts of it are metaphorical, or maybe not. Parts are apocryphal, or maybe not. Maybe you're supposed to stone gays to death... or maybe not. For an all powerful creator who is going to sentence me to eternal torment for failing to follow his laws, God is kind of a dick for not even making clear what exactly is real and what is not. Edit: For fucksake, the Ten Commandments appear in Exodus. Am I suppose to obey those? Or are they just part of the metaphor? Caros fucked around with this message at 03:09 on Dec 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
This book is God's only message to us and our only hope of salvation. But don't believe a word of it, it's all a bunch of magic crap made up by polytheist primitives.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 03:09
|
|
|
Caros posted:Edit: For fucksake, the Ten Commandments appear in Exodus. Am I suppose to obey those? Or are they just part of the metaphor?  Nope, his death on the cross made it all redundant.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:This book is God's only message to us and our only hope of salvation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 03:11
|
|
Caros posted:The bible which, by your own admission here, is unreliable as all gently caress. Parts of it are metaphorical, or maybe not. Parts are apocryphal, or maybe not. Maybe you're supposed to stone gays to death... or maybe not. For an all powerful creator who is going to sentence me to eternal torment for failing to follow his laws, God is kind of a dick for not even making clear what exactly is real and what is not. Hold on. God did not write the Bible. Nobody with any knowledge at all believes that anything besides possibly the very first part of Genesis could have been divinely transmitted, and most people who study the Bible know that those sections were also written by people. Leaving that aside, Jesus specifically states what the law is in the New Testament- love thy neighbor as thyself, and love the Lord God with all your heart, mind, and soul. Like, that's a key part of the Bible.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 03:12
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Hold on. God did not write the Bible. Nobody with any knowledge at all believes that anything besides possibly the very first part of Genesis could have been divinely transmitted, and most people who study the Bible know that those sections were also written by people. What is the proof of god? The Bible. What is the proof of the truth of the Bible? Nothing, people wrote that. Ergo: The Bible is not proof of god, and nothing substantiates god. What is the proof Jesus was god/son of god? He said so!
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
Christians like Kyrie are really scary to me. Maybe you would go on a crazy murder-rape rampage if you didn't have the divinely-inspired word of God to guide your morals, but most normal people wouldn't. Get help.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
quote:The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God. Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. For no word from God will ever fail.” I dunno, sounds a bit rapey to me. Is it taken for granted she wanted to be the host for a demigod by all sects or are there some that contest it? Also about the holy trinity, do Christians pray to different aspects of YHWH for different things? Like would you pray to the son for peace, the father for strength and the holy ghost for ghostbusting?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Hold on. God did not write the Bible. Nobody with any knowledge at all believes that anything besides possibly the very first part of Genesis could have been divinely transmitted, and most people who study the Bible know that those sections were also written by people. But that part is also written by men. So how do we know that part isn't simply Apocryphal? We're already accepting that large parts of the bible are metaphorical or simply outright untrue, why should we believe this specific section or quotation has any more significant providence than any other. Maybe Jesus actually meant to say that you should go out and gently caress your neighbor whenever possible just like you jerk off. Maybe Jesus was secretly emo and was all like "Love your neighbor like you love yourself... not at all!". Maybe that whole section was made up out of whole cloth after the fact because it sounded like a good message. I wasn't actually stating that God wrote the bible, but rather working with the assumption that it had to have been divinely inspired if we're taking it seriously as the only path to salvation for the souls of humanity. If you want to argue that it's just a book written by men, then what makes it any different than any number of other books written by men.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:I dunno, sounds a bit rapey to me. Is it taken for granted she wanted to be the host for a demigod by all sects or are there some that contest it? yeah i don't think ancient gross old men really cared about hashing that out
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 01:21 |
|
|
Barent posted:Christians like Kyrie are really scary to me. Maybe you would go on a crazy murder-rape rampage if you didn't have the divinely-inspired word of God to guide your morals, but most normal people wouldn't. I'm quite a fan of how Jesus is like "don't you judge people, thats for God to do (who is also me but also a ghost)," and then Kyrie will talk about how he's decided all non-believers are sociopaths. While invoking divine retribution on people who aren't in your book club isn't.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 03:20
|
|