/lit/ - Literature

>>14902040
I don't know about others but a God like that sounds fuckin' based. Would worship/10.

You would be all of those things as well if you had to deal with savages like God did.

>>14902049
>t. Chad's Brad's best "friend" Thad

sounds like a lack of testosterone

>>14902040
He's not wrong.
God:
Committed genocide
Set a bear to kill a bunch of young boys for making fun of his prophet
Ordered the genocide and enslavement of various tribes
Accepted child-sacrifice
Allowed slavery
Instituted all sorts of draconian laws
Ordered some old man killed for picking up sticks

>>14902040
>GOD IS A BULLY WAHHHH

>>14902064
he's right but it's still cringe as fuck

Arguments like these by Hitchens and Dawkins are what unironically made me an atheist. I've yet to see someone refute them.
It just makes it seem infinitely more likely that the whole thing is something made up by savages at the time that they lived and using the worldview that they had rather than divine inspiration.

>>14902093
If your coming from a place where you literally believed in the Bible, I totally understand. I’m glad you “got out” in that sense.

>>14902093
Yeah, I don't really think any serious intelligent religious person actually believes in the Bible. They probably have some vague sense of spirituality, and they use the Bible as a sort of guidebook. When I read how God acted in the OT as a teenager I instantly realised it was made up. I mean what are the chances that God, the creator of all thing, has the exact same moral worldview as all of the Bronze-age nomad tribes?

Almost as though G-d is an allegory.

>>14902114
>G-d
Hahaha

Dawkins is a senile old man. I've even heard some of his biggest defenders and fans call him a retard over this tweet.

>>14902055
>create savages
>waaaah why do I have to deal with savages
boo hoo.

>>14902123
This has to be satire

post the eugenics one

>>14902093
Arguments? These are surfacelevel observations. Now, I don’t disagree with you not liking OT God for those reasons, but why in the hell would you need Dawkins to explain it to you when it is right there in the text. He’s not making some revolutionary nuanced critique or anything.

It’s like a teenagers observation of the text, more interested in how it’s wrong rather than why it was appealing in the first place. It’s painfully easy to decry it, like complaining about rick and Morty just because others do and flanderizing a position. My 6 yo brother can and does that. it’s much harder and more compelling to deconstructing the why, and having a well rounded disagreement with it. Think nietzche or something.

>>14902077
"Cringe" would be the hordes of unintelligent and overimaginative individuals reading such a primitive book of tribal savagery and subsequently transforming it into an abstract philosophical worldview which they base their entire identity around, arguing it to reflect a true metaphysical account of reality and serve as the objective moral standard for all human beings to live according to and shape their society around. People like Dawkins are merely addressing something which should have been apparent and didn't require a statement in the first place, but unfortunately needed to within our corrupted timeline.

>>14902164
This is true but the point I made was about his writing style, which is so long-winded and pretentious that he opens himself up to mockery. He could have made the exact same point without using grandiose sounding words like "pestilential" or "sadomasochistic"

>>14902056
go back

>>14902040
It's almost as if every single reddit 'intellectual' was bullied in school.

>>14902040
Seething molested cuck

>>14902064
Based God

>>14902410
Most "nerds" and Reddit type "atheist intellectual" types were bullied but can't seem to understand it's because they are edgy, insufferable faggots

>>14902379
Ew. No. You stop being a bootlicker that says thank you to someone spitting into your soup

>>14902049
this but unironically.

>>14902164
>That’s not cringe! “Cringe” would be *proceeds to post cringe*

>>14902040
Others have stated that better than him, and have given their answer to that better than him.

“But, Mr Hagelmayer, it's still not over.”

>>14902040
Why god make a bad thing why god evil and not make everything easy
Life hard

>>14902492
But do you eat shellfish?

>>14902532
I'm not him, nor am I Christian, but what's wrong with that?
Are you going to use the ceremonial law arguments that everyone uses that have been answered since literally the beginning of Christianity?

>>14902093
You're just seeing it from the pov of the democratic anti-authoritarian present. In a different time it would have been just God getting down to business. Value judgments from our percieved "enlightened" status aren't worthwhile, especially when we're subject to making judgments just as unknowingly "cruel."

Dawkins was a regular visitor to Epsteins island, and a frequent flier on the Lolita Express. So aside from being a brainlet, he was also a child abusing pedophile. Look into it.

>>14902093
What arguments?

>>14902106
I know people with PhDs and shit who believe in the Bible. Ironically I know more (devout) Christians with PhDs and high level qualifications than I do atheists, and I'm in a secular country.

>>14902567
Wrong with what? Eating shellfish? Nothing if you're not jewish.

What ceremonial laws?

>>14902578
This wouldn't surprise me, but: source?

>>14902580
Ah, then true, I don't even know if it even counts as a sin or whatever if a religious Jew eats pork or shellfish or whatever
Ceremonial laws = the things like "do not wear mixed fabrics, do not eat shellfish" that Jews had

>>14902585
I dont remember where I got the link, it was in a leaked list of lads who were on epsteins plane and island. Id say they have done their best to clean all traces of it from the internet. Stephen Pinker and Daniel Dennett were on the list too.

Read the Book of Job.

>muh christianity halted progress

>>14902585
>I don't even know if it even counts as a sin or whatever if a religious Jew eats pork or shellfish or whatever
I think when it says something like
>an ABOMINATION unto the LORD
Then doing that thing is a sin

>>14902604
Neither of those surprise me, either. I know a few others have been, too. Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, and so on.
I know that Dawkins was molested and has defended "mild pedophilia" in the past so I couldn't say I'm surprised - and Pinker is an ethicist, and all ethicists are unethical

>>14902618
But I don't think they have any real problems with it. Jews don't have the same conception of sin as do Christians, according to Jews I've met.

>>14902093
>applying human standards of moral to god
>applying 20th century western standard to the bronze age

>>14902578
Christians really aren't in any position to point others out as pedophiles, given how they've conducted the greatest institutional scandal of child molestation in recorded history, with the cases only continuing each week. There's a hilarious "Curb Your Meme" video on Youtube with Richard Dawkins and George Pell, where the latter phrases a sentence in a way that could be seen as suggesting child molestation, and Richard points it out and begins laughing, followed by Pell correcting his comment and attempting to move on while being mocked by the audience. And then it shows an article from a few years later, on Pell being convicted of actual assault. Here:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5ZQedZWy9M

>>14902040
The problem of evil is the only argument required. Nobody could answer that while also applying the doctrines of a single religion

>>14902063
>that physiognomy
looks like it too

>>14902444
I don't see the relation

>>14902736
t. intellectual cripple

Antti Laato & Johannes C. De Moor - Theodicy in the World of the Bible
C. S. Lewis - The Problem of Pain
Chad V. Meister - God and the Problem of Evil
Chad V. Meister & Paul K. Moser - The Cambridge Companion to the Problem of Evil
Charles Seymour - A Theodicy of Hell
Errol E. Harris - The Problem of Evil
G. W. Leibniz - Confessio Philosophi: Papers Concerning the Problem of Evil, 1671-1678
Gregory A. Boyd - Satan & the Problem of Evil: Constructing a Trinitarian Warfare Theodicy
Henning Graf Reventlow & Yair Hoffman - The Problem of Evil and its Symbols in Jewish and Christian Tradition
James L. Crenshaw - Defending God: Biblical Responses to the Problem of Evil
James L. Keller - Problems of Evil and the Power of God
John Piper, Justin Taylor - Suffering and the Sovereignty of God
Mark S. M. Scott - Journey Back to God: Origen on the Problem of Evil
Mark S. M. Scott - Pathways in Theodicy an Introduction to the Problem of Evil
Michael Stoeber - Reclaiming Theodicy: Reflections on Suffering, Compassion and Spiritual Transformation
Michael Stoeber - Evil and the Mystics' God: Towards a Mystical Theodicy
Pavel A. Florensky - The Pillar and Ground of the Truth: An Essay in Orthodox Theodicy in Twelve Letters
Philip Yancey - The Question That Never Goes Away: What Is God Up to in a World of Such Tragedy and Pain?
Trent Dougherty - The Problem of Animal Pain: A Theodicy for All Creatures Great and Small

>>14902040
David T. Lamb - God Behaving Badly: Is the God of the Old Testament Angry, Sexist and Racist?
E. Randolph Richards - Paul Behaving Badly: Was the Apostle a Racist, Chauvinist Jerk
Paul Copan - Is God a Moral Monster?
Paul Copan & Matt Flannagan - Did God Really Command Genocide? Coming to Terms With the Justice of God
Trent Horn - Hard Sayings: A Catholic Approach to Answering Bible Difficulties
Ulrich L. Lehner - God Is Not Nice: Rejecting Pop Culture Theology and Discovering the God Worth Living For

Bonuses:
John H. Walton - Ancient Near Eastern thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible
John H. Walton & Andrew E. Hill - A Survey of the Old Testament
John H. Walton & D Brent Sandy - The Lost World of Scripture: Ancient Literary Culture and Biblical Authority
John H. Walton & Jonathan S. Greer & John W. Hilber - Behind the Scenes of the Old Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts
Karlfried Froehlich - Biblical Interpretation in the Early Church
Katharine Dell - Who Needs the Old Testament?: Its Enduring appeal and why the New Atheists Don't Get it
Mark McEntire - Portraits of a Mature God: Choices in Old Testament Theology
William Sanford Lasor & David Allan Hubbard & Frederic William Bush & Leslie C. Allen - Old Testament Survey: The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament

>>14902882

>cope: the volumes

>>14902882
what's the solution then ?
You did not read any of those and they're from different religions and traditions

>>14902889

>some more volumes of cope

>>14902040
Sounds like he's never even read the bible

>>14902889
you google and copy posted you mongoloid

>>14902736

Good things allowed or all things allowed, which one is good?

>>14902892
Nope

>>14902897
>what's the solution then ?
Study and see it doesn't work

>>14902901
Nope

>>14902919
These are all the books I have actually, but do keep trying

>>14902929
you study so much you can't even answer me. Well spent time

>>14902943
I may be able to, but I don't actually know what you want me to tell you. What is it you want to ask me?

5:4.9.The concept of a semihuman and jealous God is an inevitable transition between polytheism and sublime monotheism. An exalted anthropomorphism is the highest attainment level of purely evolutionary religion. Christianity has elevated the concept of anthropomorphism from the ideal of the human to the transcendent and divine concept of the person of the glorified Christ. And this is the highest anthropomorphism that man can ever conceive.

5:4.10.The Christian concept of God is an attempt to combine three separate teachings:

5:4.11.1. The Hebrew concept—God as a vindicator of moral values, a righteous God.
5:4.12.2. The Greek concept—God as a unifier, a God of wisdom.
5:4.13.3. Jesus' concept—God as a living friend, a loving Father, the divine presence.

>>14902946
what's the solution to the problem of evil ?

Got any mroe o' dem *furiously scratches neck* buzzwords?

>>14902929
>NOOOOOOO NOT MY COLLECTION OF BOOKERINOS NOOOOOOO STOP STOP STOP ITS NOT COPING OR MEANINGLESS SOPHISTRY LANGUAGE GAMES IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE THAT AN ALL POWERFUL AND ALL LOVING GOD DOESN’T LIFT A FINGER TO STOP EVIL FROM HAPPENING MUH FREE WILL NOOOOOOOO

>>14902952
The short answer is that the problem of evil is two arguments rolled into one; one intellectual (that fails) and - usually - one emotional. One gets angry at answering the intellectual form when the issue is an emotional one. The emotional one, people just need a hug. Both, I feel, can satisfactorily be explained that most people who deal with the problem of evil look at it only from a temporal, human outlook. Otherwise, the books would go into it in more detail, especially when I have retards like >>14902955

>>14902955
>he's on /lit/ and he's afraid of books
Cope

>>14902960
So in other words, you can’t explain it, so you just post a wall of book titles and hope people will just go away. Great job, dumbass

Origen and others already dealt with this kind of problem. It would set you free from naive Biblical literalism however it would require you to grow spiritually in order to overcome these obstacles that God put there on purpose.

>>14902968
>ask for answe
>give one
>you can't explain it
I literally just did, you fucking numnuts.

>>14902971
>in order to overcome these obstacles that God put there on purpose.

What purpose?

>>14902865
Calling someone a bootlicker is reddit?

>>14902971
Decent answer, but a few problems:
>implying atheist retards have ever even finished the Bible, let alone read Origen or Aquinas
>implying they don't think they know everything because they went to church and colored in some pictures of Adam and Eve and Noah as a child
>I WAS RAISED IN THE RELIGION I DON'T NEED TO KNOW WHAT SOME GUY SAID why is dad unhappy with me :(

>>14902974
You didn’t, so let’s try again:
1. God is all powerful
2. God is all loving
3. There is evil in the world

Now, explain this works

>>14902040
Holy shit, I love god now.

>>14902960
That's a non answer. What's the point of reading that much (presumably) if you can't even make up your mind and the best you can come up with is :
>I feel, can satisfactorily be explained that most people who deal with the problem of evil look at it only from a temporal, human outlook.
Yeah ? Guess what we're human, whatever the outlook if it's our's it is a human outlook. If we accept the incomprehensible moral system of ever changing God it's an unending cycle of absurdity .
>people just need a hug
Seriously. Are you that naive ?
A hug ? what's life to you?

>>14902040
In other words the God of the Old Testament is ALPHA ASS FUUUUUUCK. Yahweh is a fucking Chad.

>>14902992
I did. There's not an issue with them. You see it as that because you don't like the idea that things will be held accountable. Evil exists because there is a purpose for it, right now.

Again, these books are specifically designed to deal with these issues in greater detail. Anyone who has even a little bit of intellectual honesty wouldn't try to get a spoonfed answer in a few characters on an anonymous board, now, would they?

>>14902999
>make up your mind
I didn't know you're in my mind.

>Yeah ? Guess what we're human, whatever the outlook if it's our's it is a human outlook
That's part of the point. You see things only from a "this life" perspective, what happens now. It's a view that doesn't deal with the issues; that these things, should God exist, can -- and in the case of religions -- will be made good once more.

>ever changing God
Nobody believes that

>Are you that naive ?
Are you that confused? It's simple. Many people don't have or want an argument; they have grievances.

>>14903029
>this life perspective
you build on sand. It's a huge cope.
"Oh I just need to die and move to a different plain of existence before I understand THIS life"
Does that make sense to you ?

>>ever changing God
>Nobody believes that
God contradicts himself on multiple occasions in the bible. there no rigid moral code other than some loosely common sense social constructed commandments.

>Many people don't have or want an argument; they have grievances.
nobody wants grievances, people just want answers, truth . I f you can't find that even in an all powerful God what's the point ?

>>14903074
That wouldn't make sense, no -- if that's what I said.

>God contradicts himself on multiple occasions in the bible.
Not really

>nobody wants grievances, people just want answers, truth . I f you can't find that even in an all powerful God what's the point ?
I can one hundred percent say that is not the case. Most people do not want the colder, intellectual answers. They want an emotional response.

>what's the point ?
It's about whether or not there is a God, that's all. Him doing stuff you don't like means diddly squat, and it's something that has been answered for years by many. Unfortunately, it's not a short answer. That's the problem with this question.

>>14903029
Again, more sophistry. There is precisely zero need for accountability and entire systems of immorality and punishment when you’re dealing with a god that is both able and willing to put a permanent stop to all evil. On top of that, he’s all knowing, which means that before he planted the tree of knowledge and told humans not to eat from it, he already knew they would do so anyway. Furthermore, he got angry with those humans, despite the fact that he knew all of this was going to happen in advance. Why plant the tree of knowledge in the first place, if you know in advance that it will doom an entire race of sentient beings to eternal punishment? That is simply incompatible with any idea of love. Then again, so is infinite punishment for finite crimes. It doesn’t take a genius to see that that is completely imbalanced, but I’m sure you have some piece of dumbass sophistry bordering on self hatred that will make what is obviously wrong right again

>>14903090
>everything that makes me look stupid is sophistry and cope
>i don't like this he's a dumbass and probably hasn't even read the books :(
Why should I even bother continuing? It's clear you don't want to be wrong.
Unfortunately for you, these have been answered, too. If you actually wanted to know, you should go to a Christian apologist.
Of course, you'd say the same thing to them as well, because you simply can't stand that you're wrong.

>>14902976
There are many purposes because God is very wise. One purpose is to test people's moral structure. I think that God can be pleased with atheist for rejecting him if they saw him as evil. I think God can be disappointed with his Believers for blindly accepting anything that they are told as well. They're going to keep looking into the matter, not being satisfied with a god that could appear to have a flaw. But also not satisfied that there would be no God. Of course God made me feel very special since he showed me how to make sense of the Holy scriptures. There is a reason the New Testament says that no one has seen God but the son. There is a reason why Jesus was going around calling people play actors.

>>14903107
Again, you hide behind your books. If you had a solution to this problem, you would’ve given one by now. What you’re doing right now is little more than a badly concealed argument from authority.

Again, we go back to the problem at hand:
1. God is all powerful
2. God is all loving
3. There is evil

Explain, in your own words, how this works.

>>14903114
None of that serves any purpose whatsoever. Your god is already all knowing, all powerful and all loving. There is literally no need to test anyone for anything. If he wanted to, he could make perfect worshippers, that worship him until the end of time, without any need for any moral test whatsoever. According to your religious beliefs, he can do this right now. He can stop evil forever (I’m going to completely ignore the fact that it doesn’t need to exist in the first place if God was all powerful, but whatever) and turn the entire universe into a paradise this instance. It wouldn’t cost him any effort whatsoever. So, why doesn’t he?

One thing God tries very hard to preserve is people's freedom. That's why he hides so much. His people's freedom is more important than any temporary evil that might come about. Human beings absolutely despise their own freedom. modern governments are so huge because people hate their freedom and they need someone to take care of them and take responsibility for them. They literally support evil in the world and yet whine and bitch that there's evil in the world.

>>14903118
I answered. You're just dismissing the answer because you dislike it.

1. God is all knowing
2. God is all powerful
3. Evil has a purpose

God permits evil for now. It will be dealt with in the future. God permits it for many purposes, including ones we do not know as of this time. No amount of bitching and whining will make this change.

Evil is not an argument against God. Never has been, never will be.
We're going in circles, though. I plan on leaving soon.

>>14903133
Sorry buddy but since God said you exist because of my "freedom from" it means that he can't control you. God is pretty offended that you want to be a fucking robot.

>>14903135
There is literally no need for freedom to exist at all. Why would God need to ‘choose’ to worship him? He’s God. I frankly don’t understand why he feels the desire to be worshipped in the first place. He already has every trait of perfection he could possibly have. All of this just sounds like one giant shitty cope to justify a world that your god obviously doesn’t give a fuck about

>>14902040
Yeah, idiot, might is right. You're not in a position to judge God, because you have no enforcement power. You're way off-base if you think dogmatically suggesting that rasicm, sexism, mysogyny, infanticide, genocide, filicide, or infliction of plagues are "morally bad" would hold weight in the eyes of the only being in the universe whose opinion actually matters. His subjective opinion is law. You not liking him makes YOU morally bad, because you are the only one subject to the other's judgment.

People who can only think of fiction from their own perspective make me sick.

>>14903145
Yes, that’s why he makes rules, and wants followers, to follow his rules, without any exceptions, and even doubting these rules will get you sent instantly to the eternal fires of hell.

But he definitely doesn’t want robots

>>14903153
This is literally the logic of a beaten housewife. If I get punished, it must always be my fault. This is a prime example of being docile and weak

>>14902123
>>14902137
it obviously is a Trumpian impression

>>14903151
Oh how funny. Look at how you don't think you need Freedom at all. Since you don't want freedom so much then you can be born as a human to live in a deterministic world and see how you like it. unfortunately that will cut you off from God's plan of a perfect universe but once you taste this world you will see how much you need freedom and how much better it is to exist in our perfect reality like you used to. But of course God never really leaves you and everything we go through always has meaning.

>>14903160
>This is a prime example of being docile and weak

Yes, compared to a GOD.
A god literally owns you. You do what he says or he tortures you forever. And if anyone else says they don't like it, they also get tortured forever. There's nobody stronger than him.
The angels already tried revolting and they're way stronger than every human combined can ever be. So if you act up, you get hurt and it's called justice. Everyone agrees, or else they get tortured forever, and that's called justice too.
Your complaint makes sense if there's a chance you can overthrow the boss. But in this case it's a monotheistic god. Literally no one can. Which means he makes all the calls. Which means he's right, and you're wrong.

>>14903160
the analogy would be accurate if the housewife couldn’t possibly leave the house or take away the power of the husband

>>14903156
Sorry but you're not speaking to a religious slave. I stood up to god a long time ago and I was rewarded for it. but you can believe God is a devil too. eventual it'll piss you off a lot. Unless you're just a selfish coward that would worship any evil person that comes along. God does not will that people rot in hell but it would be wrong of him to let good people always exist around evil people. When people wish to stop being evil They will be allowed into God's Kingdom. I'm not like my foolish brethren who thinks they can justify Satan as God. The lamb speaks with a voice of a dragon and yet no one bats an eye. It was already foretold.

>>14903173
>Look at how you don't think you need Freedom at all.

Neither does God think this, because every time I use said freedom to do something he doesn’t like, I get eternal punishment for it. So in other words, I’m free to do as he tells me. That’s basically a dictatorship disguised as freedom. So not only am I not free, I’m also being lied to

>>14903195
So in other words, we’re already in hell

>>14903215
No you fuckwad, you are free to make the wrong choice. being punished for something isnt being unfree, it is simple retribution.

>>14902164
Callow, naïve. Not only anachronistic but chronistic.
But now that judgement's been passed, what is to be done about the last 2000 years inclusive of right now? How shake off the monotheistic yoke, etc.?

>>14903088
why are you lying ? The god of the bible doesn't contradict himslef ?

>Most people do not want the colder, intellectual answers. They want an emotional response.
Maybe you do, not everyone is an emotional wreck.

>It's about whether or not there is a God, that's all. Him doing stuff you don't like means diddly squat, and it's something that has been answered for years by many. Unfortunately, it's not a short answer. That's the problem with this question.

Me ? What has that got to do with me. It's cruel absurd by all standards known to men.

for having read tha much you know close nothing and can think even less .You read yourseolf stupid It's laughable

>>14903221
No, because in hell you get LITERALLY TORTURED, FOREVER. Here you just have to follow the rules. If that compares to having your skin peeled off every day for all eternity for you, you're not thinking clearly.

>>14903212
>but you can believe God is a devil too.

That would incorrect. The devil doesn’t create a shitty world, then blames me for it, then forces me to love him and worship him through hopelessly corrupt institutions. For all his flaws, the devil doesn’t come across as nearly half as evil as your god is

>>14903238
Yes, for finite crimes. If that doesn’t make your god evil, I frankly don’t know what does. Your god is literally worse than every single despot that ever lived. At least the crimes of a despot are finite. Your god is significantly worse than this.

>>14902617
based vikings

>>14903252
>If that doesn’t make your god evil, I frankly don’t know what does.
>>14903153
The only thing that does is the guy who overthrows him, labels him a criminal, and most importantly enforces a punishment. In God's lore, that guy doesn't exist. Therefore, he's just and you're the evil one. Don't worry though, he'll probably forgive you if you humble yourself.

>>14903235
>The god of the bible doesn't contradict himslef ?
If you come from a simplistic understanding and don't look into the text in depth, then I can understand why you would think this. However, it may be worth asking someone who has studied these, like an apologist or a priest (not some random pastor). They can give you an answer.

>Maybe you do,
On the contrary, I have literally never given a shit about the problem of evil, even when I was an atheist. I have never really found it to be an issue. I'm one hundred percent certain that the majority of people only see the problem of evil from an emotional sense. If you think otherwise, that's laughable.

>>14903235
>for having read tha much you know close nothing and can think even less .You read yourseolf stupid It's laughable
Even if your spelling and grammar were not as atrocious as you wrote with your fat, angry fingers, I would still not take any notice. I have given you a good starting place, but you can only grow further. I can lead a horse to water, but cannot make him drink it.
Take care.

>>14903241
Did God make this world or did you? The thing about losing your immortality is... Vulnerability, lack of wisdom, lack of knowing who you are, fears, ect. It seemed like such a good idea at the time, in Theory. Did you know that women hit men more than men hit woman? But it's okay because women are weaker. But I understand. You want to be lost. You want to experience mortality and Folly. It can be a good learning experience for you. And what a surprise you will have one day, when you remember God. But yes, this world is a minor hell. Only immortal beings would think they could make it in such a kind of world as this.

>>14903274
those are clearly typos, I see I pissed you off which is undesrtandable considering all you can do is direct me towards something or give half assed answers. Curious you read that much on the problem of evil since you don't really care about it ,,,
Assuming you did read any of that.

Anyways you are just a posturing gimp, there's no substance to what you say and you can't think or articulate . There's no point to reading if you're not critical and can't make good use of it

>>14903252
He's probably just going to tell you that Yahweh is the objective moral standard itself, therefore all complaints or charges against him rendered null by definition. Infinite punishment for finite crimes? That's completely fair, because Yahweh says so, and because I've already arbitrarily decided Yahweh to be the objective standard of fairness itself.

Basically anything which happens to be written down in the Judeo-Christian scriptures is immediately rationalized by its believers to be the objective moral standard (without any reflection on the basis of doing so, or how to ever confirm it to be the case), and all criticism of the policies therein is therefore pointless. Just obey whatever the rules say, because if its true then you have no power to change any of it, and because you don't want to take a chance in case the consequence of punishment is real.

Take the threats of consequence out of the picture, however, and the Christian population would probably halve overnight. They'd realize there was literally no reason to follow any of it, they could have simply lived their own lives and formed their own opinions on reality free of consequence, focusing on their own personal spiritual growth and not simply contorting their minds towards blindly aligning with a small set of writings found of a fairly recent historical cult which won't likely exist 4,000 years from now (and didn't exist even 4,000 years ago). But that "revelation" will not likely ever occur to them, given the nature of Abrahamic psychological conditioning.

>>14903331
>those are clearly typos,
Yeah, because of your fat sausage fingers.

> I see I pissed you off
Honestly? Not at all. I'll admit I rolled my eyes and sighed with boredom once or twice, though.

>since you don't really care about it ,,,
Yeah, because others do, so I wanted to see what people respond to it. Not a difficult concept to grasp, now, is it?

>>14903331
>you are just a posturing gimp, there's no substance to what you say and you can't think or articulate
Ironically, I think the same about you. You dislike the fact you're wrong so you're freaking out.

>There's no point to reading if you're not critical and can't make good use of it
See above.
You have no argument, you're just angry. It's quite sad. I'm a critical person, reading from many different books on different religions. The problem is that these are covered in depth by others. You literally just don't like the fact that they have been answered and want me to spoon feed you instead of having to pick up a book yourself.
On a literature board.

>>14902040
Yea he is based, what is his point ?

>>14902040
As god is pretty much a description of reality or a method to explain the reality of Being, its obvious. Of course god is injust, racist, whatever; because this is the nature of Being itself, the human condition. If the old testament god would be a nice happy cuddly teddy bear than the book would not work as a guideline for your life. Real life does not consist of everything being nice and shiny.

But I dont expect a simp like Dawkins to understand any of this.

>>14903423
>Yeah, because of your fat sausage fingers.
that made me giggle. I ain't fat mate, I don't write often on a keyboad especially in english.

>Honestly? Not at all. I'll admit I rolled my eyes and sighed with boredom once or twice, though.
see you keep posturing

>Ironically, I think the same about you. You dislike the fact you're wrong so you're freaking out.
So I'm wrong because you replied "not true", "not really", "akshuallyyy", "your wrong" ...
You refuse to elaborate on anything, you smooth brain. Why can't you handle confrontation ?

>See above.
You have no argument, you're just angry. It's quite sad. I'm a critical person, reading from many different books on different religions. The problem is that these are covered in depth by others. You literally just don't like the fact that they have been answered and want me to spoon feed you instead of having to pick up a book yourself.
> I'm a critical person, reading from many different books on different religions.
>want me to spoon feed you
>"I'm so much better than you anonymous guy on the Internet, franly I'm so well read I don't have time to prove anything anything you say is wrong "

See you're posturing. You might have converted but you're still the same conceited smooth brain you were as an atheist.
You are dumb, the same blabbering dork lacking substance.

>>14903489
>I don't write often on a keyboad
Hands too big?

>>14903489
>you keep posturing
That's not posturing.

>So I'm wrong because you replied "not true", "not really", "akshuallyyy", "your wrong" ...
Nah, you are wrong because you're wrong. If I had said anything like that, you'd still be wrong even if I hadn't.

>You refuse to elaborate on anything
I have, though; every time. I don't know what more you want. An essay?

>Why can't you handle confrontation ?
I can, but I find people who think they're smarter than they are annoying, especially when they're just pretending.

>you're just angry.
Not at all.

>>14903489
>See you're posturing. You might have converted but you're still the same conceited smooth brain you were as an atheist.
>You are dumb, the same blabbering dork lacking substance.
Not posturing, and you sound mad.
>ask questions
>I keep it short because of word limits, as a nice overview
>suggest books that cover it in detail
>"y- you're dumb a-and a dork"
Fuck me, and you have the audacity to call me a smoothbrain? You want to be spoonfed but ignored everything. You're not as smart as you think. You try -- and fail -- to make out like you're smarter than you are. I've been giving half-assed answers because I've been more interested in other things (for example, I'm watching commies get buttmad at someone because he disagreed with Lenin) to respond to some half-baked retard who keeps typing "s- see you're dumb and angry". I knew for a fact you wouldn't be worth my time, but I even gave a little bit here-and-there because I was feeling generous, all for some inbred cuck to dismiss everything and still call me names.
This is why more and more people are waking up to the fact atheists are stupid. Not even mad, just genuinely disappointed in you.

>>14902040
This quote demonstrates perfectly the religious ressentiment fundamental to the atheist liberals, of which Richard Dawkings is one.

>>14902049
>>14902073
>>14902123
>>14902410
>>14902417
>>14902492
>>14902578
>>14902604
>>14902913
>>14903007
>>14903153
>>14903437
>>14903557
Ladies and Gentlemen: The logic of evangelical Trump voters.

>>14903562
t. Liberal atheist Jew with Trump derangement syndrome

>>14902635
jews play clever semantic games to argue around what does and does not constitute sin.

>>14903569
Shame that they can't argue for shit

>>14903565
You're the one who worships the Semitic storm god Yahweh, and a Jewish rabbi from Judea. Stop projecting.

>>14903562
Rent free. Also, not an argument. Prime mover argument is all you need to know there is a God

>>14903584
>nooooooooo you can't just follow a Semitic god if you must believe then you have to worship the gods of your ancesterinos!!!

>>14903562
no. most of this board is larping as catholic or orthodox christians.

>>14903584
>Jooz bro!!
Faggot cuck, make something of yourself

>>14903613
t. Liberal atheist Jew

>>14903622
t. Liberal atheist Jew

>>14902689
catholic clergy are less likely to abuse children than school teachers or camp staff. why the intense scrutiny on only the church?

>>14903630
>Jooz bro!!
Faggot cuck, make something of yourself

>>14903649
t. Liberal atheist Jew

>>14903635
>catholic clergy are less likely to abuse children than school teachers or camp staff
False.

>>14903654
Not him and not even pro-Catholic or pro-Christian but I gotta say that this is statistically true

>>14903622
None of those three apply to me. Faggot, make something of yourself

>>14902040
what about the protagonist from my diary desu

>>14902040
God of the OT is a symbol for the savagery of nature that we negotiated our way out of as conscious beings. It's mythology. Some people either can't or won't see the stories like this and I think it is telling that Dawkins is incapable of religious experience (as proven by his meeting with Michael Persinger).

>>14903660
No it isn't, and you know it. Otherwise you'd be able to provide those "statistics". No other institution beats the Catholic Church with respect to abuse cases per person of authority.

>>14903703
gay and stupid. the savagery of nature is based.

>>14903703
God was just to wipe Canaan of those blaspheming, idolatrous, adulterous, murderous,
covetous pagans if you'd ask me. :)

>>14903635
If I recall correctly, the statistics on Christian institutional abuse often come from the very institutions themselves (Ithe Vatican, for example), which is why I imagine the real figures are higher than what have been reported. Also, even while other institutions have specific individuals who are found to sexually molest their subjects (such as school teachers), Christianity represents the largest institutionalization of the phenomena in history - meaning, the institution itself is complicit, not merely individual deviants. The highest members of the organization were directly involved in not only the assaults themselves, but an extensive operation towards covering it up and allowing it to continue throughout time. And it continues to this day, if my local news station is reputable. I don't only target the clergy, but they deserve far more criticism than other groups since they have enacted an organized scandal unparalled by any other institution. And above all, you'd think that Christians or specifically Catholics would be the most vocal about the horrors going on in their holy institution, especially given how they spend the rest of their time chiding others on moral matters. But nope, quite quiet from what I saw. The cognitive dissonance of your most sacred institution being corrupt to the brim is too difficult for most people to bear, so instead of dealing with the situation like any other group might, we see injustice roam free on an unprecendented scale for modern history.

Your statistics may or may not be correct, but that doesn't change the fact that entire school boards and youth camps themselves are not molesting students, individual staff are. And when they get caught, they're fired and arrested. Whereas the Vatican itself is to be charged with a worldwide network of orchestrated molestation, and when one such priest gets caught, their fellow pedos-in-power simply relocate them to a new building and they resume their business undisrupted.

>>14902532
Acts of the Apostles. Literally all atheists had to do was to finish the Bible to answer this retarded objection.

>Hates Christianity, but shits himself with all the other religions
k (((senpai)))

>>14903805
people that favor their tribe are going to be a lot less critical of their tribe. and they surely made some bad moves when they try to hide their sins. Go figure Hypocrites in a religion, that's never happened before. It will be so outrageous if they do not try to purify themselves. It shows how little they love God when they tolerate such evils. But I can't say every single person in the church is evil. Isn't the Boy Scouts going bankrupt because of this kind of stuff too?

>>14903703
Definitely. That's what the standard theological interpretation of the Old Testament is according to all major Christian denominations. You're not just making up your own modern view of the obviously primitive stories and then ignoring the fact that virtually all Christians believe the book to be a genuine account of regional history, to constitute a valid ethical constitution for the time and place and people it concerns, and to have transitioned into something different following Christ's arrival and sacrifice.

Dawkins is just an idiot essentially telling people who already consider it to be savage myth not to take it for the foundation of their literal worldview. Why is he even doing that? I've never heard a Christian, be it those in this thread or the rest of the world, ever claim literal belief in the Old Testament as a series of real historical events, or to have a perfectly moral constitution for human behavior. Never. There aren't countless works of apologetics dealing with the very subject, such as those offered by William Lane Craig and Frank Turek.

On a serious note, no serious Christian believes in your worldview and your beating a dead horse by insulting Dawkins, since it's clearly become trendy now to insult new athiests just like it previously was to mock Christians.

>Some people either can't or won't see the stories like this
Yes, they're known as "most serious Christians", who actually practice the faith you're pretending to have the correct understanding of, and whose immensely widespread existence people like Dawkins unfortunately have to appear in order to then combat.

>>14903890
It can still be meaningfull mythology at its most fundamental level even in spite of most peoples taking it literally and everything else you said being true. The idea of a judgemental God transcends any and all earthly structures set up in its wake. Seethe harder and read more.

Just because most people are plebs means nothing. Truth is truth regardless if it is understood. With atheism we're fucked. With a terrible and ugly God we're fucked. Only a God that is good cuz I can make us good can unfuck us. Humans are the ones that are fucked, that's why their criminal justice systems are full of all kinds of evils.

>>14904221
And that can make us good*

>>14904171
So I agree with you that it "can" be interpreted mythologically and in the particular way you described, but I think it's unfair to specifically lampoon Dawkins for his criticism of the scripture and the culture surrounding it, when you know very well that most religious believers perceive the document in a different light than your stated interpretation. Seems like a cheap way to insult those "stoopid gaytheistS" rather than acknowledge the general stupidity and lack of nuance often found of religious cultures on the whole, and be a bit more even in your critique. If people were solely discussing the OT in a figurative sense, representative of the human condition and other familiar realities, then people like Dawkins and Hitchens would never have rose to prominence at all, as they'd have no movement to pursue in the first place.

>>14904242
I'm not interested in acknowledging the stupidity of organised religion, it's already well-known and a dead horse. But Dawkins et al are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The old testament is mythology whether or not that is appreciated by most people, Christian or atheist.