/jp/ - Otaku Culture

Cute pic, dude.

You are just mad cause you are going straight to hell.

Nope, you are a sinner, just deal with it and prepare for an eternity of pain.
You deserve it no matter how much you try to deny it

>>10315687
Two problems with your reasoning:
1) Japanese hell is not for "eternity". It can be for a number of years > than the probable age of the universe, but then the sentence ends and the subject reincarnates.

2) Shikieiki is a good woman. But justice is blind.

RISE /jp/

>>10315726

She regularly assaults her subordinates rather than gently guiding them back to the proper path.

A shameful Yama.

Compare to Biblical Hell:

Rom. 9:9-24 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son. And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

>>10315740
It's tough love.

>>10315748
Christianity a shit. Go burn in your fictitious hell.

>>10315781
Where in my post did I say I was a Christian?

>>10315784
Well, he's talking about christianity, not you.

>>10315800
He said, "Go burn in your fictitious hell." Note the "your."

>>10315804
I know

You're forgetting the fact that barely living is a sin.

Not even the hermit-like "living too long", just living.

It's from the ground up a flawed and ridiculous system, so nitpicking about one aspect is hardly fair.

But don't fret, it's fool of loopholes if you ever find yourself dying in gensokyo, like the fact that you can cheat out of it, skipping all the judgment, attaining enlightenment, and other bothersome things, simply be having someone destroy your ghost before you reach Higan.

WE WILL NOT BE DEFEATED BY ONE MAN

>>10315843
It's not Yama's fault, people shouldn't blame her for that.

>>10315811
Then given the context that his post is a reply to mine, it makes sense to interpret the term "your" as referring to me. He could have just as well said, "They can go burn in their fictitious hell," and it would be clear that he was not referring to me.

You're forgetting the fact that barely living is a sin.

Not even the hermit-like "living too long", just living.

It's from the ground up a flawed and ridiculous system, so nitpicking about one aspect is hardly fair.

But don't fret, it's full of loopholes if you ever find yourself dying in gensokyo, like the fact that you can cheat out of it, skipping all the judgment, attaining enlightenment, and other bothersome things, simply be having someone destroy your ghost before you reach Higan.

>>10315851
I understand

>>10315857
No you don't. Not yet.

>>10315878
Oh, I do, you can be assured

I never said that. Stop accusing me of stupid shit, asshole.

>>10315748

nigga, you expect me to read all this shit?

>>10315963
who are you ?

>>10315973
It says that God decided who goes to heaven and who goes to hell before creation, and that it isn't dependent upon your actions in this life, and that if he decided you are going to hell there's nothing you can ever do about it.

>>10315990
That makes perfect fucking sense. He is God, after all. Sounds like someone is being a whiny little bitch.

>>10315990
Except kill god.

>>10315990
Anon, entries in the book of Life change.

Revelation 22:19
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Revelation 20:11-15
11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

-----

TLDR: Don't be an asshole and the judeochristian god has no quarrel with you.

>>10316027
That isn't possible within Christianity.

>>10316027
>>10316049
His best weapon is basically a burning bat handed out to all of his mindless servants, who cannot even be kept from revolution. You know, if you actually read their mythos, their god is just an arrogant douche with an inflated ego.

>>10316054
Christian God is capable of wiping out the entirety of creation at his whim. There's nothing you can do, sorry.

>>10316064
He claims to be all-knowing, but his mythos clearly demonstrate otherwise. Same for the all-seeing bit, the all-powerful bit. Hell, he nearly dies to a robotic, mindless servant, and even that because it was the only actual conflict he was in. The Bible is a massive case of needing to use your head and not your eyes.

>>10316074
You must refer to Genesis, I assume? "Who told you that?"

The answer is simple: The tone of God is of that of a judge in that sentence. He is asking the defendants to explain their case.

Tradutore Tradittore

>>10316074
It sounds to me like you're just parroting nonsense from atheist websites. You should look up the Christian understanding of anthropopathy in the Bible and why it is necessary given the ectypal nature of human knowledge.

>>10316092
This is a really shaky argument based on a fallicious understanding of iwhat it means to be an intelligent creature. Sorry.

>>10316093
He is a very angry guy. It seemed to me that if you were all-knowing, you would be pretty relaxed about things, instead of getting angry about them.

>>10316103
>This is a really shaky argument based on a fallicious understanding of iwhat it means to be an intelligent creature. Sorry.

I doubt you even understood what I said, given the juvenile nature of your other posts. Could you explain why the archetype/ectype distinction regarding divine and human knowledge is fallacious?

>>10316103
- Lies
- Not taking responsibility for their own fault
- Disobeying a direct order
- Wanting to take his place

I don't know about you, but I would also be mightily pissed/disappointed.

RISE /JP/

>>10316108
What exactly do you mean by "divine knowledge"?

>>10316115
Disappointed, but if you always knew it was going to happen, would you still be angry?

>>10316092
For what it's worth, I'll try to explain this a bit. God is not human, and so he does not have human emotions, or such things. If God is said to be angry, or jealous, or whatever it may be, we are not being told that God experienced a human emotion. What is happening is that a truth concerning God is being communicated in a way that human can understand. Human knowledge is not the same as divine knowledge. The divine knowledge is infinite, and encompasses all truths to their fullest extent, whereas human knowledge is finite and darkened. The things of God, as they are known to God, are not capable of being understood by humans, and so said knowledge must be condescended to our understanding. Putting something into such a human paradigm is also used to just simplify a description of something, to relate in a more easily understood way. So, for instance, if God appears not to know something in the Bible, this is not saying that God does not know something, because we know that God is omniscient; rather it is describing something in a human way, or God has interacted with humans in a way condescended to their understanding. Hope that helps.

/jp/ - christianity general

>>10316180
One way to see it, for me, is that he didn't have the need to, in the same way you don't go reading your daughter's diary if you trust her.

If Satan and Lucifer are the same person then why are they two different stakes of purgatory?

checkmate christianity

>>10316189
I have to disagree with that idea, yeah.

>>10316224
A fair enough point, I suppose.

>>10316235
IIRC, they are explicitly seperate. Lucifer is the angel that rebelled against heaven, and Satan is a servant of god set to manage the damned.

>>10316180
Divine knowledge would be the knowledge that is known by God.

>>10316235
>I have to disagree with that idea, yeah.

I don't care whether you agree or not. Would you like to explain why it is "fallacious" as you claimed?

>>10316235
Purgatory doesn't exist.

>>10316255
What you defined as divine knowledge is nonsense. The difference is how much is known to each. One piece of knowledge is not inherently better on one side than it would be in the other.

God is gay and a fucking asshole. I don't care if he's real or not, he's a dick. He promises eternal life if you let him fuck you over and be his servant.

Something to remember is that his system is a monarchy. I'm not bowing down to a king who easily makes angels incapable of suffering and of pure perfection, yet chooses to make flawed beings capable of it.

What if

What if

God is so omniscient that our concept of "all-knowing" is in fact limited, and that simply knowing what is going to happen is just a single thread amongst all the possibilities ever.

>>10316242
>and Satan is a servant of god set to manage the damned.

Complete nonsense. The one who punishes the damned in Hell is God. Satan is punished in Hell along with the damned.

Rev. 14:9-11 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

>>10316264
That depends, anon. Take for example, chess. The pieces know how to move and how to capture enemy pieces, yet they do not know nothing beyond their little space. The player, however, knows what lies beyond the game, the room the chess set is in, the house said room is in, and what neighborhood that house in.

It can also change the rules of chess so it resembles bowling instead. That would be divine knowledge.

>>10316278
I could have sworn that they defined hell as an absence of god, not a punishment.

>>10316284
The chess piece is not intelligent; it does not actually know anything.

>>10316264
I never said that ectypal knowledge is "less true" if that's what you're getting at. The fact that the knowledge has been condescended by God means that ectypal knowledge is true. Humans can know true things.

>>10316291
>I could have sworn that they defined hell as an absence of god, not a punishment.

The damned in Hell are punished by God.

>The chess piece is not intelligent; it does not actually know anything.

He was using that as an example. To understand it you will need to apply the idea to the situation at hand. It's not difficult.

>>10316297
If the chess piece was capable of thought, as the example would require, it should be able to grasp the concepts given to the player.

>>10316304
Okay, simple logic: A pawn knows it is at war. It cannot retreat and must always move forwards until it can kill the enemy king.

It does not however know that it is part of a game system as a controllable unit by the player.

God just likes to make situations so he can hurt people
He sends the angels to get sexed by Sodom's people so that he can then blow it up
He makes the Pharaoh stubborn so that he can send all the plagues on Egypt
3.

>>10316322
Are you going to make me repeat myself all day? That is not how thinking works.

/jp/, I can barely stand on topic bickering as it is.

Christianity isn't even on topic.

Please stop or take it to /b/.

>>10316332
A mouse may know that it lives in a cage and that at regular intervals food and water will appear in the cage, but it is entirely unable to comprehend why the cage is there, or the process of manufacture that created the cage.

>>10316297
>The damned in Hell are punished by God.
They are punished by devils who may or may not serve God.

I sometimes wonder what happens when I commit suicide.
Will I be sort of reborn have somewhat of my old memories left but be another (better) person?

I'm always thinking about better situations, how things could be if x about me was different that I could be happy, I really hope I get a heart attack soon.

>>10316326
Actually, no.

God sends the angels for a reason: Someone has "sued" Sodom of being filled with corruption. However, two witnesses are needed to warrant judgement, otherwise it is void. Abraham served as the defendant(Sodom)'s lawyer, trying to make God spare them, but lost the case.

In short, God was trying to teach Abraham how to carry out a proper trial.

>>10316326
He refused the first time, when he asked nicely.

>>10316386
You probably would get an even worse life as karmic retribution for not valuing your previous one.

>>10316386
What do you guys think?

I'm not going to drink bleach, a rather instant death would be nice

>>10316386
You'll be reincarnated as an ant, everytime you are stepped on and eaten by people/other bugs, you'll reincarnate into an ant.
You'll experience working in a hivemind and reliving your deaths until you've atoned for your sins.

>>10316370
No, they're not. That's a common public misconception. Prove it from the Bible.

>>10316391
Most governments don't give into terrorist demands.

>>10316400
Well, once you start caving in, everyone marches on you. Fight or die.

Shut up nerds

>>10316409

>>10316398
And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name.
And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.

>>10316414
The seventy are the Christ's disciples. Jesus is telling them that they will have various powers. Learn to read.

>>10316064
Christian God gets rather stumped by enemies in Iron Chariots, however.

"And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." Jg 1:19

But she's canonically not like that at all, you fucking secondary.

Picture completely relevant to this thread, btw:

>>10316750
But Remilia is /jp/ related, whereas this thread is not. Ergo, your post is the more /jp/ related than this thread.

>>10316698
>Those that dwelt in the mountain (the mountains that were round about Jerusalem) were driven out (v. 9, 19), but those in the valley kept their ground against them, having chariots of iron, such as we read of, Josh. xvii. 16. Here the men of Judah failed, and thereby spoiled the influence which otherwise their example hitherto might have had on the rest of the tribes, who followed them in this instance of their cowardice, rather than in all the other instances of their courage. They had iron chariots, and therefore it was thought not safe to attack them: but had not Israel God on their side, whose chariots are thousands of angels (Ps. lxviii. 17), before whom these iron chariots would be but as stubble to the fire? Had not God expressly promised by the oracle (v. 2) to give them success against the Canaanites in this very expedition, without excepting those that had iron chariots? Yet they suffered their fears to prevail against their faith, they could not trust God under any disadvantages, and therefore durst not face the iron chariots, but meanly withdrew their forces, when with one bold stroke they might have completed their victories; and it proved of pernicious consequence.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhc2.Jud.ii.html

The only way it can be read the way you read it is to ignore all context and forcefully interpret it so that it will be contradictory to the rest of scripture. But of course that is the most popular method of interpretation for the internet atheist brigade, isn't it?

>>10316846
I think it's hilarious that you put in greentext a mass of TL;DR; text that's NOT ON THE FUCKING ORIGINAL SOURCE, which allows me to answer this perfectly with a:

who are you quoting?

Of course apologists will be apologists and distort everything to fit on their premises. This is their job. For everybody else, the very humane nature of the Bible remains pretty much self evident.

But then again, I have no idea of what you believe. Are you a believer on biblical inerrancy? If so, Matthew 27:9 should be a check-mate. The gospel writer made a very human mistake there (mixed Zacariah for Jeremiah, IIRC) which trivially proves that mistakes can exist on the Bible.

Do you believe the Bible can contain errors, but it's a generally godly book? Then I tend to agree with you, but noting that humanity progressed beyond the barbaric practices described there, and would do better on filtering a lot of the bad stuff there to keep the good parts.

Any other position? Then explain it further. I'm not an atheist, btw.

To keep this on topic, here's a Flandre.

>>10317050
>I think it's hilarious that you put in greentext a mass of TL;DR; text that's NOT ON THE FUCKING ORIGINAL SOURCE

What does this even mean? I clearly linked you to the source. If you doubt it for some reason here is a scan of the book: http://archive.org/details/expositionofoldn186001henr

>Of course apologists will be apologists and distort everything to fit on their premises. This is their job. For everybody else, the very humane nature of the Bible remains pretty much self evident.

Could you beg the question in an any more obvious way? All you said, "Well the answer is obvious to us but everyone else distorts it." Do you expect me to take you seriously?

Read the verse. The "he" in the verse is JUDAH. Judah failed to conquer the inhabitants of the valley. There are numerous places in scripture where God promises to give strength to people or some such thing and they lack the faith to go through with it, the most obvious example being Peter beginning to sink after getting afraid when Christ told him to walk on water. This is just another example. There's no reason in the text to interpret it as God not being omnipotent, when the entirety of scripture says otherwise. Your interpretation is forced eisegesis to create a contradiction where there is none.

The issue of Matthew 27:9 is well known, and we can discuss it if you wish, after you deal with the current issue. My beliefs on biblical inerrancy are not at question here, but your ridiculous interpretation of Judges.

>>10317133
Dude, he is clearly Judah, but the LORD was with him. It's cute when you put the lack of faith argument, but this is nowhere explicit there, as it is when they biblical writer wants to make a point of it, as in Peter or in any of the numerous cases of the israelites ignoring the fucking columns of flame guiding them to worship a golden goat or something.

The "source", is the Bible. You can link to entire encyclopedias of apologists, and I'll answer with a "TL;DR;" or "who are you quoting". I simply don't care about how people who part from a set of premises (that the Bible is an inspired book) contort to explain away the silliness.

If the "ridiculous" interpretation is not clear enough for you, here's a short comic to make it clearer: http://www.thebricktestament.com/judges/iron_chariots/jg01_19a.html

>>10317231
Let's look at the evidence:

1. The Lord is with Judah and has promised them victory against their enemies
2. God is described in all of scripture as omnipotent, that he will always keep what he promises, etc.
3. Judah (for some reason, this is the issue) fails to conquer one of their enemies.
4. God's promises in this way are shown in other sections do be dependent upon the people taking some action themselves, such as having faith, getting out of the boat, etc.

So what is most likely? That this actually says that God was unable to defeat some iron chariots and Judah failed because of this? Or that Judah for some other reason did no go up against these enemies, perhaps out of fear or otherwise?

How can you possibly think it is the former interpretation? The only reason anyone could read it that way is because they specifically want to create a contradiction. Either that you or you are truly an idiot. This isn't even an issue of apologetics, it's an issue of basic reading ability, context, and common sense. You are making a fool of yourself.

I just sinned in my pants /jp/.

>>10315687
Except, you can actually make a case in front of the Yama. Only catch is that she knows if you are lying. Then she'll pull your tongue out. On top of that, the traditional view is that you get reincarnated after you suffer for your wrongdoings. It's hardly an eternity, unless you've destroyed the universe or some other improbable shit.

>>10317251
This post makes the one where you accused me of begging the question hilarious in hindsight. Here, let me show to you the huge question you're begging:

0. ASSUMING GOD ACTUALLY FAVORED THE ISRAELITES...
1. The Lord is with Judah and has promised them victory against their enemies
2. etc...

There. If you don't give the Bible that item #0, then it becomes a collection of culture hero stories / annals of kings / phylosophical works. I'm not giving you the question #0 to argue on your terms.

Once you read about humanity's story, it becomes quite obvious that God, if he exists, doesn't play favorites and showers all the humanity with mostly random blessings and curses. The israelites become then, just yet another self-righteous tribe of their time and place, following a warlike tribal god that's simply their own tribal identify projected on the plane of ideas.

Genesis is a book of culture heros. Abraham, Joseph and co. are trickster heroes that clearly succeed by their own wits and project their victories on "god" to become legend. By the time Judges is happening, there's a priest caste that's interested on keeping everybody believing that everything that happens is thanks to god's designs. They write the books with this mindset. And so on. (there's also the plainly bullshit parts like Jericho's walls)

But Judges is part annals too, and so the iron chariots incident. It's not a warning about what happens when people lack in faith, it's a cleric forgetting to add the editorial opinion after making a record of some battles.

Finally, here's two demons, to keep things on topic.

What the fuck happened here? Why did this thread go the way it did? Why is a christian preaching on 4chan? Why do kids love the taste of cinnamon toast crunch?

>>10317341
Because it's so well balanced between white and black?

>>10317333
>0. ASSUMING GOD ACTUALLY FAVORED THE ISRAELITES...

Okay, so your argument is, "f we ignore what the Bible says, then it doesn't say what it says." Fascinating. I'm done. Like I said, what you're doing is simply eisegesis, reading your own views into the text rather interpreting what the text says. Have fun with that.

>>10317392
No god damnit, it's full of sugar and shit.

>>10317341
I know, right? But I like that >>10316846 kun is of the well-read Xtian variety, which is really cute. People still that dedicated to a single faith are moe.

The important question right now is why aren't we talking about our actual savior and lord. The picture is related.

Woah shit man it's like I'm a teenager on forums again.

>>10317513
Most /jp/ users are God-fearing, celibate Christian men.

>>10317535
I would expect our religion to be Islam. We prefer our women to be pure and like them to wear silly hats (like burkas/hijabs)

>>10317400
I'll change the subject for a bit here, then. When you read the Hindu holy texts, do you "ignore what the Vedas say"? What about Shinto's holy texts? The norse ones? Or do you say your religious expertise is restricted to the Bible?

If you take all the humanity holy texts at face value, then you end with a multitude of gods / a god that's suffers from Multiple Personality Disorder / whatever, so you DON'T DO THAT.

You do one of the following things, instead:
1) You give special treatment to one of the numerous holy books (statistically, the one your parents also favored) and treats all the others as "mythology". This makes you kawaii as fuck.
2) You interpret ALL the books trying to find the common points and then you start to appreciate all those works for what they are: the stories of humanity struggle to understand our relationship with the Ineffable.

>>10317548
1 Cor. 11:5-6 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

>>10317558
We, I assumed, were having an argument about "What does the Bible say happened in Judges 1:19," not "What do we personally think happened in history." If I read the Vedas I think, "What do the Vedas say?" I can recognize what the book says without believing in it. I can read the Bible and understand that it says, "x is true," and then read the Koran and understand that it says, "x is false." Trying to interpret a text on its own terms does not mean that you must agree with it.

The jews did 9/11

>>10317548
I would like to believe fellow /jp/ers would favor treating women as persons worthy of love instead of two-legged child making commodities, but that's just me.

>>10317333
I have always wondered how the jews are NOT favored. Wherever they go, they prosper, wether people like it or not. They have stuck with the commands of their god for millenia, and have remained apart from others successfully, just as it was commanded. Everything "bad" that happens to them usualy returns with something that overcompensates their previous situation.

I dunno. They are beyond lucky.

>>10317718
>They have stuck with the commands of their god for millenia

Ignoring anything involving Christ, they don't give sacrifices anymore and there has been no Temple for 2,000 years.

>>10317718
It is not because of unwillingness to offer sacrifices. The problem with that is because the Temple was destroyed. If they manage to kick the muslims out, and they will, a third temple will be built, and sacrifices will be resumed.

As a rabbi told me anyway.

>>10317748
>there has been no Temple for 2,000 years

They've also been curiously lacking any further revelation or prophets from God for the same time.

>>10317748
There are also jewish christians out there. Do those count?

>>10317817
Do they count as what?

I like how old people act sinfully their entire lives then once they are getting close to death they suddenly become religious zealots.

If there is a God I hope he has a special punishment for these people.

>>10317718
The short version is because they have a better understanding of what "being a nation" means than most other nations. The old testament, for all its human failures it's a kick ass job of nation building.

Seriously, just following their laws preventing jew-on-jew bad practices would make other groups endure and prosper too.

Too keep things on topic, where did I hear about a people which is also a country which is also religion, with a lot of [racial] purity ideals and a fixation with ritual cleanliness before?

>>10317855
Nope.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Workers_in_the_Vineyard

>>10316189
What are the fruits of the spirit.

>>10317898
I clarified in an earlier post that human knowledge, despite being ectypal, is still true, given that it is condescended to our understanding by God. So the fruit of the spirit is indeed truth, among other things.

>>10317892
Welp.
Fuck that shit, what's the point of living as a NEET sage.

>>10317907
Because it is the right thing to do? Because it will do you good at the end anyway?

Prodigal son and all that.

>>10317696
Where does it say in any religious book, that you must treat women as commodities and not show any love?

>>10317855
Regarding "mercy", I'd like to introduce /jp/ to this little pimp here: Jizou, which is a japanese version of the Bodhisattva Ksitigarbha.

Jizou/Ksitigarbha became an enlightened being and as such earned his transition to Nirvana. However, he refused to leave the premises before ALL THE HELLS WERE EMPTIED. Get this? While Christianism is all hot about all the hellfire sinners will get afterwards, baldy here decided to stay around, including inside hell, to help people there to realise they don't need to stay there. Jizou in particular became the protector of aborted fetus/stillbirths in Japan, because they have a fucked-up culture there that blames the kid on their premature death. Jizou helps the little ones to exit the limbo where they exist and move forward. Komachi keeps statues of him around for this.

Jizou will keep on trucking until all the sinners AND ALL THE DEMONS have been enlightened and leave hell. He's the guy that'll turn off the lights of hell. Christianity has nothing on him.

>>10317583
So I went and reread Judges again, and I now believe you're right. While the text doesn't mention a "because Judah lacked faith" afterwards, the whole theme of that book is: Israelites fuck up things all the time. It's shown time and time again that they cannot fight their way out of a wet paper bag without the LORD on their side. So the chariots incident there fits nicely into this overall narrative.

It's still a human narrative, but it makes more sense now. I stand corrected on that mistaken interpretation. Thanks!

>>10317981
I honestly don't know why you thought you were arguing with an actual Christian at any point in time.

But [spoilers]Javert let Valjean go in the end.[/spoiler]

But [spoilers]Javert let Valjean go in the end.[/spoilers]

>>10316115
Knowledge of things like loyalty and obedience hinge upon good and evil.

Also,iron chariots.

>>10318106
>Also,iron chariots.

Did you even read the thread?

>>10318106
That's the entire point. They now *knew*. They knew they did wrongly, they knew they were lying but they did it anyway.

>>10317945
>because they have a fucked-up culture there that blames the kid on their premature death

That makes sense. The kid's dead, so you might as well blame it instead of yourself.

>>10318135
Without the prerequisite knowledge of good and evil,such concepts are meaningless,indeed,I would even say they cannot be divorced from each other.

>>10318132
Whoops,I just finished,but this is still somewhat wrong.

The truth is that jewish beliefs evolved over time:

They went from polytheism-->monaltry-->monotheism.

If you look hard,you can find references to God's weakness,such as the tower of Babel,and I believe references to a divine council consisting of other gods somewhere in the Old Testament.

When the Jews got obliterated by the Persians,they lost and could either say their god,which was tied totally to national identity for all the cultures back then,was destroyed,or they could say he used an empire as his weapon,that was the jump when they declared YHWH to be the only god in existence.

I'm sorry,I won't shit up the thread any more.

>>10318220
There is knowledge though. They both were warned that messing with the tree equaled death, yet they disobeyed a simple, but very specific, order.

Then, instead of pleading guilty they declared being innocent. They made their case worse.

>>10315687
I'm not afraid of Shiki Eiki,I'll simply offer myself up as a slave to Eirin to be used for sex and other things in exchange for the immortality elixir.

Yama can't do shit to me then,and I can convert her into my waifu.

>>10318220
If you're talking about Adam and Eve, I think you'd have to prove that they did not understand good and evil. The information we are given about them is rather brief, and there is likely a lot that we do not know about their state of minds or the state of the world pre-Fall. So I don't think it's safe to think they didn't understand. Rather it would make more sense to think that they did understand, given that they were created as adults with functioning minds, were created in the image of God, and were given a moral command not to eat from the tree.

>>10317945

/tg/ here. What a fucking baller. I wanna make my next character based on him

>>10318746
It reminds me somewhat of the Mask of the Betrayer expansion for Neverwinter Nights 2 and the character Kaelyn the Dove.

Excellent game and expansion, completely blows away the base game campaign. I would recommend it just as a game, but especially for your new character/campaign as perhaps some inspiration.
If it's in the Forgotten Realms, saving lost souls from the Wall of the Faithless could work for a campaign base.

>>10317945
Hah, fucking catholic. Jesus does exactly the same thing.

>>10318772

Fuck yes Kaelyn

I need to replay MoTB. Fuck, it was so good. Bear gods, bald mages, crazy eldritch conglomerations of souls, oh my

>>10319006
>Bear gods
/jp/ - Okku Culture

>>10319006
Aw damn, I keep hearing how good MotB is, but my autism prevents me from starting it unless I can finish the base campaign. And god damn it, it just drags on and on, and I keep starting anew because I realize my character sucks and is boring to play halfway through.

>>10319055

I wholly assure you that it isn't worth it in the slightest. None of the old characters are really given any recognition or significance save one, and the events are only loosely related to the base campaign

Save yourself the trouble. I understand your autism, I share the same opinion, that base games ought to be beaten before expansions, but if you're missing out on MotB because of the base campaign, just fucking skip it