/lit/ - Literature

What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 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.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
17 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.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 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?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

>i do what I want lol i made you
Well ok then

Don't be a weasel. It's "if god is omnibenevolent, why bad thing happen?" which is a legitimate question.

>>15488378
>14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”[a] 16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”[b] 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. 19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”[c] 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

whoa! can't argue with this logic bro. better become a christian now

>>15488378
In other words, Yahweh is a wicked demon.

>>15488408
I've never herd anyone call God omnibenevolent before, there is a squiggly red line under it as well. I think it's a fake word.

Better worship MLK or some madlad from Arabia.

And yes MLK stands for Martin Luther King, 'muricans.

>>15488400
>>15488420
hold on... so he specifically allowed pharaoh to exist just so he could later send Moses to ask him to let the Jews go and then he would "harden" pharaohs hearth to have an excuse to send a bunch of plagues and kill a ton of kids, all so everyone on earth would go "whoa that god sure is strong!!" and people unironically defend this?

>>15488426
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnibenevolence

>>15488487
What hath science wrot

>>15488426
>fake word
Words are ephemeral representations of thought. Aka they don't exist

>>15488594
>science
Doesn't exist

Find Christ

>>15488611
>science
>doesn't exist

Elaborate, anon

I'm curious

The answer to op's question is: the universe doesn't give a fuck about you. That is why bad thing happen to good anon

>>15488658
Demonic rites (science as you know it) are practiced by priests (scientists and engineers) in worship of Knowledge. The revelations and scripture of the priests are traditionally passed down through generations in textbooks and manuals.

Science doesn't exist. It is religion.

>>15488807
Nobody mentioned "the Universe", anon.

>>15488378
>>15488400
>>15488420
i wonder how christians justify something like this

>>15488487
Not all Gods are omnibenevolent. This may be a criticism of Christianity but not Buddhism or Paganism for example.

>>15489189
Who are you a mortal to defy God and try to command him?

>>15488378
Both sides are the same
If you're an atheist because you serve the word
Or because God in the Bible is not Good enough.
Atheism is simply the logical conclusion of Christianity.

>>15489230
I hear a lot of talk about "superior mortality" coming from that God, but he fails to display even basic decency. Questions must be asked.

>>15488378
>Don't ask questions and keep adoring me.

>>15488378

Imagine using 2000 year old fictional books that include child sacrifice, rape, murder, and slavery as your guide for 21st century life

>>15489879
Excuse me, the informative pamphlet didn't answer our question, it said that God respects our free will (which is speculative at best.) Then it says that God's combating evil and he's obviously not doing a very good job so he's either unwilling or unable, which takes us back to square one. Then it brings up the story of Jesus, which just begs the question all over again. Why does God need us to murder his son, transform crackers and vino into his son, then eat one son-cracker and drink one sip of son-wine every week? Why can't he just change the rules so that everybody who repents their actions is instantly saved? Is he unable or unwilling? That takes us back to square one.

We are nothing but a lump of coal in God's eyes. You don't find it immoral to throw a lump of coal into the furnace?

Paul uses the potter/clay analogy, but a piece of pottery can be beautiful. It is impossible for us to be beautiful in God's eyes. We will always be disgusting, wretched, liars, thiefs, murderers, full of lust and hatred, and on our own we will destroy ourselves. And the destruction of ourselves is always just one generation away from happening.

We need God. God doesn't need us.

>>15488465
>>15489189
>using something as subjective and arbitrary as morality to try and disprove god
This is like saying god exists because the world is “beautiful”

>>15490049
>worshipping a God that is an amoral taskmaster when it's convenient for him to be

Cope.

>>15490049
It doesn't disprove all Gods, but it does disprove an all-powerful, all-loving God.

https://www.bethinking.org/suffering/the-problem-of-evil

>>15490068
all-powerful means God has the power and right to either preserve or destroy anything

all-loving means God showed his love to the whole world by sending first the prophets, who were persecuted, and then His own Son to redeem the world. It was the world who rejected His Son by murdering Him.

>>15490114
They bring up the old free-will argument (where's that in the Bible?) and then they go on to deny God's omnipotence by declaring that God is incapable of breaking the rules of Logic. There, I've spared everyone else the effort of skimming it.

>>15490153
>being unable to set limits on oneself (ontological impossibility) means you do not have unlimited power

>>15490153
Daily reminder Craig believes animals don't suffer. How is it that God can create out of absolutely nothing but can't contradict identities? Craig's a brainlet.

>>15490062
>>15490068
>god can only be moral and all loving according to my subjective experience

Free will can't exist if god exists.
If god makes everything and gives everything will. Everything that happens with that will is gods will and if we can defy gods will with our own will then god willed us to defy it.
It's like having a kid and putting candy and a banana in front of it. You low-key want it to choose both, even if you prefer bananer you want the kid to express it's will and be able to choose the candy. In the end though, you give the kid the option to choose the candy so it was your choice all along.
>God controls the means and distribution.
>Defy gravity permanently. Cant? Gods will interfering with your own.
Do you understand the complete clusterfuck of paradox that is god?
If god is real. God must be both "evil" and "good" and "all-loving" and "all-hating". Since god is the source of everything, that has to include hate.

>>15488378
>if god real why bad thing happen?
To humble the wicked and bring them back to God.

>>15490202
>No mere subject can legislate what God is or isn't allowed to do, except me

>>15490195
Why did he set limits on himself? Why hasn't he unset them? Has he lost his keys? That's not very omnipotent.

>>15490202
God has murdered more people in the opening book of the Bible then any human who has ever lived. That mean's that God is failing to live up to the lofty standards set by Joseph Stalin. I think that's a bit beyond the scope of 'subjective'.

>>15490213
>misunderstanding my argument THIS bad
all of reality is nothing more than consciousness and each individual human consciousness is nothing more than a creation of God’s consciousness subjectively experiencing morality in various ways

>>15490219
>why does a triangle have to not be a square? that’s not very triangle like of it

>>15488843
I love this stupid ass take you probably got from twitter and you spout around like it's the greatest bomb of truth you can ever drop
just because the social dynamics of two things are analogically comparable, it doesn't mean they work, in fact, through the same paradigm.
There's a very clear distinction in the way "scientists" and "priests" deal with reality; if you wish to undermine this, only to probably found your worldview on some sort of credulity you have about a handful of "esoteric takes" you read on the internet, please know you are a retard.

>>15490253
You again. Localized evil is still evil.

>>15490261
Triangle's aren't supposed to be beyond all limitations. By definition, they have many limitations.

>>15490273
My point is, why are you asking why an existing being has to follow its own ontological rules in order to not contradict its own nature and collapse in on itself?

>>15490269
>look! I’m using arbitrary definitions of evil!

>>15490282
Because God's whole premise is that he makes the rules. Ontology is a set of rules, if God can't change them, then clearly, he doesn't make all of the rules.

>>15490237
He has every right to wipe us off the face of the earth. If He saw fit, He would turn our planet into a boiling hell like Venus.

He is God. Who are you?

>>15490294
God doesn’t “make” the “rules”. The rules exist as a result of God existing in the first place.

>>15490295
I've not even killed one person. Which makes me God's moral superior. Everybody on Earth is also God's moral superior. We all have the right to look down our noses at him. There's a reason fat-neck-beards like to make fun of God, it's because he's an easy target.

>>15490312
I guarantee you have eaten meat, or eaten a vegetable at some point in your life anon. You are directly or indirectly responsible for the death of a living being

>>15490305
That means there are things above him. We should be worshipping those things then, not him.

>>15490328
the absolute state of your reading comprehension.

>>15490325
The cow had already been killed and processed for meat when I ate it. If I didn't exist, the cow would still be dead and processed for meat. I had no part in it's death, I just helped get rid of the corpse.

>>15490334
Help me out here. If God doesn't make all of the rules, there are two possibilities 1) Somebody else made some of the rules. 2) The rules were already there, and God is powerless to change this. Either way, it implies there's something, either a being or a law of nature which has superiority over God.

>>15490305
So God is consubstantial with the rules that guarantee death and suffering? That's even worse than the free will argument.

>>15490339
Do you think slaughterhouses bloom like mushrooms, and consumers just come along and pick cuts of steak like gods drinking ambrosia? No, it's the demand of people like you that built them. You and everyone like you is indirectly responsible for the deaths of those animals.

>>15490312
If you live in the first world, you are in part responsible for atrocities that are committed all over the world.

Do you pay taxes? You perpetuate the military industrial complex. You could conscientiously object by not paying taxes.
Do you purchase meat products? You perpetuate the farming industrial complex, and are no better than someone who hires a hitman. You could conscientiously object by not purchasing meat products.
Do you support abortion? You perpetuate the suffering of unborn babies. You could object by protesting abortion clinics or even just speaking out online, but I bet you don't.
I could keep going.

>>15490295
>he
kek

>>15490361
>>15490371

Even if I used all of my (pathetically limited) power, I could not change any of these things. It's not a moral choice on my part, it's a inevitability. Declining to participate is sometimes an option, but not always (Taxes) but it's a pointless symbolic gesture anyway. These things will carry on just fine without me.

>>15490371
Then god is also guilty of all this.
>You perpetuate the suffering of unborn babies
I'm not sure you know how abortion works.
I'm pretty certain their suffering is eliminated.

>>15490371
>protip
Most plants have more pain receptors than people, sometimes up to a thousand times more. They don't die like animals, meaning they are suffering up to a thousand times more until every last cell is dead.
Go ahead, eat half of that cucumber. I fucking dare you.

>>15490392
With man, it is impossible, but with God it is possible.

>>15490415
If you think God is guilty from judging horrible human beings who rape his once beautiful creation, then humanity is truly doomed.

>>15490462
No it isn't. The more attention we give him, the more suffering happens. Remember when the Black Death happened and everybody begged him to help them and he told them to put all the black cats in a big-bag and burn them? And that just made it worse?

>>15490485
I haven't looked into this particular instance, but it seems that simple human reasoning led the clergy to believe that it was the cats who were responsible. It was the simple human reasoning which was at fault. The clergy must have passed it off as the word of God.

The true word of God can be found in the Bible, not necessarily in any one person's words.

>>15490546
Why didn't God teleport the Jellicles out of the bag? Why didn't God tell the clergy that they were wrong? Why didn't God tell people not to listen to the clergy? Why didn't God stop the funeral pyre from lighting? If no man can give us the true word of God, what does 'Papal Infallibility' mean? Why did God omit cats from the Bible, if he just wrote "Cats are not evil" perhaps all this madness could have been avoided. I'm not even all-knowing and I can think of a million ways to save the kitties. And I feel really bad for them, even though I'm not all-loving. God's failing to live up to the standards of the the average human again.

>>15490595
You would think we would start having doubts about the credibility of human reason after two world wars, the catastrophe of communism, and nearly destroying the entire world in a nuclear holocaust

but, no, clearly you have all the answers. Clearly you are god. Tell us, oh wise one, what are the answers?

>>15490595
If you are going to use human reason to refute God, then you must have something to replace it so we can rebuild.

What sort of monster would destroy a person's life without having something better prepared for them?

>>15490386
yes God is a he you faggot. That's why the bible says man is made in the Image of God.

>>15490627
A lot of wars are fought over territorial disputes, economic scarcity and ideological differences. So I say that we pool our resources and work on space exploration. That way we have as much land as we want and we can all live in a community which is in line with our values (space colonies) and we have unlimited resources (Asteroid mining). If I had any super-powers at all, I'd make this happen. I wouldn't even need to be all-powerful, any superpowers at all could help.
>>15490637
You should worship a God with limitations, I suggest Eros because he looks cool.

>>15488465
“Mankind does something evil therefore there no god” I can’t believe people still think that’s a legitimate argue

>>15488378
God isn't real.

>>15490685
Keep up man, we've already decided that God exists and I'm him.

>>15490675
"Pool our resources" sounds like communism to me. Remember how that turned out? What a fucking joke.

>>15490716
No. We start an internationally funded organisation in the vein of NATO, each country will provide a reasonable amount. No country or will be expected or allowed to hand over more then a small fraction of their income.

>>15490701
god can i have a gf?

>>15490748
And how exactly does refuting God get you anywhere closer to this goal?

It sounds like you want things to stay as they are (you don't actually want people to lose their faith in god) except lets add yet another vanity project to the list.

Meanwhile the earth is dying.

>>15490482
>Uses own logic against him
>Parry-counter kek
God allowed the rape to happen, gave us the ability to rape and the will to commit it. Therefore god not only wills us to rape but wills us to be raped.
>>15490639
kek god is unknowable and men can't give birth. Therefore god is a woman if any gender at all.

>>15490773
Girls like men with strong, muscular butts, you need to develop a strong, muscular butt.
>>15490778
God's not part of my main plan, but he's detrimental to other things that I care about and he's not contributing anything. He's surplus to requirement and he's getting in the way essentially.

The number one deniers of climate change, and the number one contribution to war, is and always will be religion.
Meanwhile religion hoards so much wealth they could literally end world hunger forever.
I wouldn't care if you were a christfag or whatever but trying to claim the moral highground as a christfag? Nope.
You're the bad guys. Cope.

>>15490783
>God allowed the rape to happen, gave us the ability to rape and the will to commit it. Therefore god not only wills us to rape but wills us to be raped.

Oh great, another person who worships human reason as god. Please, oh wise one, what ought we do? Only a monster would refute God without having something better prepared, certainly.

>>15490809
Who are the good guys? Communists? Fascists?

Religious people in America have been the most generous people in the history of the world.

Did cavemen go to heaven?

>>15490800
>God's not part of my main plan, but he's detrimental to other things that I care about and he's not contributing anything. He's surplus to requirement and he's getting in the way essentially.

How is God getting in the way?

You can't just rip God from someone's life and expect them to start worshiping space exploration or whatever. You realize they stopped broadcasting the Apollo programs after the first couple flights because people got bored of it.

>>15490846
As I said, God's not getting in the way of my space program, he's irrelevant to it. But he's causing other problems in unrelated areas. Lots of people get killed over God. As far as I'm concerned, one death is too many. As for getting people interested in my Space Program, i'd probably use mass-media manipulation (if I had the power, that is). The media can already convince people to go against their natural instincts and destroy themselves. Convincing them to do something that's going to benefit them in the long-term shouldn't be that hard.

>>15488378
https://skepticsannotatedbible.com/rom/9.html
Also,
>quoting paul
It's christianity, not paulianity.

>>15490830
>Did cavemen go to heaven?
I presume we’re talking about prehistoric people made in the image of God and therefore fully human. Like all persons to whom special revelation has not come, troglodytes were beneficiaries of God’s general revelation in nature and conscience (Romans 1-2). Their only hope of salvation would be that through an appropriate faith-response to God’s general revelation God would apply to them the benefits of Christ’s atoning death despite their ignorance of Christ. In Romans 3.25 Paul says that God sent Christ as an atoning sacrifice for sin. “He did this to show his righteousness because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.” Paul’s thought is that people in ages prior to Christ did not receive the judgement they deserved; rather God overlooked those sins until Christ came and then put him forward as a sacrificial offering to bear those sins. Similarly, in his Mars Hill address in Athens Paul says, “The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all men everywhere to repent” (Acts 17.30).

In short, the penalty for those people’s sins, so long stayed by God, has at last been paid by Christ. Thus, a place in heaven at the final resurrection of the dead is at least accessible for such persons.

>>15489189
>justify
If it’s true there’s nothing to “justify”. Your subjective bitching and crying will change nothing

>>15490934
What about that guy who put his hand on the Ark of the Covenant to stop it from breaking? The guy who got nuked from orbit? Was God overlooking that one? If so, who shot him? Is there a second deity on the Grassy Knoll?

>>15490899
So if you have nothing better, why the fuck would you refute God?

I'm not against refuting the status quo. Christ Himself refuted the status quo of the time, but the thing is, Christ had something better to give us. He had a message of love and freedom. Your message is a vanity project that would do nothing to help actual problems in the world, as you literally just admitted in the post I am quoting.
>he's irrelevant to it. But he's causing other problems in unrelated areas.
SO FUCKING SOLVE THAT SHIT FIRST DUMBASS

>>15490964
It's so tiring arguing with you people when all you have are refutations and no substance whatsoever.

>>15490964
I have lots of better ideas: Worship a God that doesn't encourage you to act out. Worship some kind of supernatural energy field that has no will of it's own. Live for your fellow man. Live for your family and loved ones. Live to be the best person you can be. Live for anything that doesn't encourage you to get angry at others.
>SO FUCKING SOLVE THAT SHIT FIRST DUMBASS

The problems that are caused by this religion? The solution is simple, we stop doing this thing that brings out the worst in all of us.

>>15490945
>What about that guy who put his hand on the Ark of the Covenant to stop it from breaking?
First, God had given Moses and Aaron specific instructions about the Tent of Meeting and the movement of the Ark of the Covenant. "After Aaron and his sons have finished covering the holy furnishings and all the holy articles, and when the camp is ready to move, the Kohathites are to come to do the carrying. But they must not touch the holy things or they will die. The Kohathites are to carry those things that are in the Tent of Meeting” (Numbers 4:15). No matter how innocently it was done, touching the ark was in direct violation of God’s law and was to result in death. This was a means of preserving the sense of God’s holiness and the fear of drawing near to Him without appropriate preparation.

Notice how David took men with him to collect the ark, rather than allowing the Levites to bring it to him. That was a great mistake, since it ought never to have been put upon a cart, old or new. It was to be borne upon men’s shoulders, and carried by Levites only, and those of the family of Kohath (Exodus 25:12-14; Numbers 7:9), using the poles prescribed. Failing to follow God’s precise instructions would be seen as (a) not revering God’s words when He spoke them through those such as Moses, whom He had appointed; (b) having an independent attitude that might border on rebellion, i.e., seeing and acting on things from a worldly, rather than a spiritual, perspective; or (c) disobedience.

Second, the ark had stayed for a period of time at Abinadab’s house (2 Samuel 6:3), where his sons, Uzzah and Ahio, may well have become accustomed to its presence. There’s an old saying, “familiarity breeds contempt,” that could apply in this case. Uzzah, having been around the ark in his own home, could very likely forget the holiness that it represented. There are times when we, too, fail to recognize the holiness of God, becoming too familiar with Him with an irreverent attitude.

>>15490945
>>15491017
Third, the account tells us the oxen stumbled. The cart didn’t fall and neither did the Ark, just as the boat carrying Jesus and the disciples rocked fiercely in the storm, though it wasn’t necessarily in danger of sinking (Matthew 8:24-27). And yet, just as with the disciples who failed to put their faith in their Master, Uzzah, for a moment, felt it was his responsibility to save the integrity of God, and that our almighty God somehow needed Uzzah’s assistance. He presumed that, without his intervention, God’s presence would be dealt a blow. As Job asks, “Can you fathom the mysteries of God?” (Job 11:7). “His greatness no one can fathom” (Psalm 145:3). “His understanding no one can fathom” (Isaiah 40:28). Moses lost his right to enter the promised land because he felt his intervention was needed when he struck the rock, instead of speaking to it as God had commanded (Numbers 20:7-12). We need to listen carefully to what God has to say to us, and in obedience strive to do all He commands. Yes, God is loving and merciful, but He is also holy and He defends His holiness with His power, and affronts to His holiness sometimes bring about His holy wrath. “It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Hebrews 10:31).

Something of God’s presence in the Ark of the Covenant seems to be lost in the church today. In the time of Moses, the people knew the awesomeness of God’s absolute holiness. They had witnessed great miracles when the ark was with them. They respected that God’s ways and thoughts are much higher than ours (Isaiah 55:8-9). In truth, the more we try to bring God down to our worldly way of thinking or reasoning, the further away He will seem to us. Those who would draw near to God and have Him draw near to them are those who approach Him in reverence and holy fear. Uzzah forgot that lesson, and the consequences were tragic.

>>15490815
>who worships human reason as god.
Wrong.
>Please, oh wise one, what ought we do?
About what exactly? Rape? Murder?
Teach people how to live with themselves and others. Teach them how to communicate and express themselves properly. Stop being such a miserly civilization begging to save every penny and instead start building things that are socially relevant. Encourage actual social growth instead of mindless competition under the pretense of self interest that only benefits few. Communal projects that encourage social contact and further the sense of community. Less mindless time and moneysinks that have no real productive or social value.
Educate, educate, educate. It can be free, it should be free and it will generate more money than you put into it no matter what shit tier excuses you come up with, arguing otherwise is the silliest thing you can do.
>>15490827
>Religious people in America have been the most generous people in the history of the world.
Sauce & cope.

>>15491017
>>15491023
>'Member when things were better?

>>15490999
>Worship a God that doesn't encourage you to act out.
I don't even know what it means to 'act out'
>Worship some kind of supernatural energy field that has no will of it's own.
How would that be any different from worshiping a rock?
>Live for your fellow man. Live for your family and loved ones.
Crypto-communism
>Live to be the best person you can be.
Meaningless statement
>Live for anything that doesn't encourage you to get angry at others.
So no one is supposed to get angry, ever?

Your human reasoning is pathetic, honestly. It disgusts me that you think you are even smart enough to solve anything of relative difficulty.

>>15491023
I sincerely appreciate the effort you put into this, but the question was not about why God did it. It was the question of what happened to that guy, since he never had a chance to hear the good news. And you've raised two other questions:

>No matter how innocently it was done, touching the ark was in direct violation of God’s law and was to result in death. This was a means of preserving the sense of God’s holiness and the fear of drawing near to Him without appropriate preparation.

Why does God want people to fear him? And why doesn't he find less-lethal ways of preserving the fear? I'd put a spell on the Ark so that thunder sounded in the distance whenever it was touched. That gets the message across and the best part is that nobody has to get hurt.

>In truth, the more we try to bring God down to our worldly way of thinking or reasoning, the further away He will seem to us.

If God can't even understand us, because we're so alien to him, why do we worship him at all? Isn't that rather like a bacterion praying to a human?

>>15491042
Communism in a nutshell. It will fail miserably just like it failed in the past.

>who worships human reason as god.
>Wrong.
You worship (venerate, hold in the utmost esteem) reason because you think reason has all the answers necessarily to live well.

>>15491059
Absolute retard.
Imagine trying this hard to misinterpret everything anon said just so you can keep chimping out over why your religion is basedest and everyone but you is a stupid nigger.
>You're a nigger.

>>15491074
>Communism in a nutshell. It will fail miserably just like it failed in the past.
kek
>Not realizing i was lowkey shilling everything religion shills.
>you think reason has all the answers necessarily to live well.
Keep telling me what i think.
This is why christcucks get hated upon.
You're arrogance will lead you straight to hell anon.

>>15491088
More refutations and no actual answers. This is the state of modern atheism.

>>15491059

>'act-out'

Any kind of hostile behaviour from swearing at somebody all the way up to declaring a holy-war. God encourages a lot of this.

>How would that be any different from worshiping a rock?

You'll never get to see it, so it will always be mysterious I was thinking something similar to pantheism, but the energy field isn't a living being so it can't tell you to do bad things.

>Live for your fellow man. Live for your family and loved ones.

Do you see what religion has done to you? I tell you to love your family and friends unconditionally and you think I'm a political subversive. You're struggling with the idea of loving people you can see and feel. People who reciprocate your love. People who don't demand you follow their laws.
>Meaningless statement

Again! Look what you've become, I tell you to achieve real, tangible things. To learn a skill or do charitable works and the idea is alien to you because you've given up on real life. Nothing matters to you except death, because you're banking on that big reward in the sky.

>So no one is supposed to get angry, ever?

And again, look what's become of you. You don't understand that there's a time and a place for anger. Anger is for times when somebody's harming or threatening you or your loved ones. Not for when some fedora-tipper is making jokes about this idea, which is clearly harming you.

>Your human reasoning is pathetic, honestly.

Then use your human reasoning, "YOU'RE ALL INDIVIDUALS!" as the great messiah Brian once said. Life after death and the meaning of life and all that are big questions. Questions you have to find the answers to, you don't need me or the church to tell you what you believe.

>>15488843
>Science doesn't exist. It is religion.
Dumbest shit I've read on 4chan in a while

>>15491097
You don't get it, anon. When your aim is all of the things you listed, it will fail.
Your aim can only succeed if it is grounded in Christ.

All you have done is listed a new set of laws that need to be enforced, likely by a police state of some sort.

When things are grounded in the solid rock of Christ, people's hearts are changed. It's the only way real change can happen.

>>15491099
>More refutations and no actual answers
People have gave you answers and you've dismissed them offhand.
You christcucks just like pretending you're smarter than everyone because you know a "truth" that no-one else does and that if everyone listens to you the world will magically get better.
Just like poltards and conspiracy fags.
Literal snowflakes demanding attention.
Meanwhile, any actual solutions presented or suggested get dismissed as stupid, unchristian or downright evil without any actual thought because that is literally too much for your retarded brain.
>Follow muh magic book to fix everything
>protip the world wasn't better when it was dominated by christians. It was worse.
>It was rampant with legal pedophilia, constant wars, famines, plagues and even if you follow the magic books advice some rando could come and say whatever the fuck they wanted and your life was over.
Also i'm not atheist. Constant triggerwords from you eh? Just like "muh heretics" & "muh antichrists" in days of old.

>Tl;dr your religion isn't actually all that shit, just you.

>>15491115
>Any kind of hostile behaviour from swearing at somebody all the way up to declaring a holy-war. God encourages a lot of this.
Have you even read the Bible? Go read the Gospel of Matthew.
>You'll never get to see it, so it will always be mysterious. I was thinking something similar to pantheism, but the energy field isn't a living being so it can't tell you to do bad things.
Doesn't sound like it would catch on.
>Do you see what religion has done to you? I tell you to love your family and friends unconditionally and you think I'm a political subversive. You're struggling with the idea of loving people you can see and feel. People who reciprocate your love. People who don't demand you follow their laws.
You're pretending to be god and laying down the law. You don't even understand Christianity. Why should I even listen to what you're saying?
>Again! Look what you've become, I tell you to achieve real, tangible things. To learn a skill or do charitable works and the idea is alien to you because you've given up on real life. Nothing matters to you except death, because you're banking on that big reward in the sky.
Saying 'live to be the 'best' person you can be' is meaningless because what is the best life for me isn't the same as the best life for someone else like Genghis Khan for instance.
>And again, look what's become of you. You don't understand that there's a time and a place for anger. Anger is for times when somebody's harming or threatening you or your loved ones. Not for when some fedora-tipper is making jokes about this idea, which is clearly harming you.
You literally said I'm supposed to worship a god that doesn't encourage me to get angry. Now you say there's a time and place for anger. If I am justified in anger, am I also justified in retaliation?

>>15491122
>Your aim can only succeed if it is grounded in Christ.
cope
>All you have done is listed a new set of laws that need to be enforced, likely by a police state of some sort.
Did you even read? None of them are requirements you fucking pleb. I never said people MUST socialize or engage in communal projects did i? That's a rhetorical question by the way because i didn't.
That's your religion that does that.
>When things are grounded in the solid rock of Christ, people's hearts are changed. It's the only way real change can happen.
Have you ever read a history book?
Witch hunts, inquisitions, holy wars, rampant poverty. People used to be condemned to death because illnesses were demons. Antibiotics weren't a recommended treatment.
Are you legit fucking retarded or are you just pretent?

>>15491150
>People have gave you answers and you've dismissed them offhand.
No, I haven't. If I did, then I would leave, but I'm still here talking. We are discussing the ideas right now. What does it look like we're doing?
>You christcucks just like pretending you're smarter than everyone because you know a "truth" that no-one else does and that if everyone listens to you the world will magically get better. Just like poltards and conspiracy fags. Literal snowflakes demanding attention.
More refutations...
>Meanwhile, any actual solutions presented or suggested get dismissed as stupid, unchristian or downright evil without any actual thought because that is literally too much for your retarded brain.
Like what? You can't seriously be thinking that anything presented here is better than Biblical Christianity.
>protip the world wasn't better when it was dominated by christians. It was worse.
>It was rampant with legal pedophilia, constant wars, famines, plagues and even if you follow the magic books advice some rando could come and say whatever the fuck they wanted and your life was over.
I think you're wrong. The world suffered the worst tragedies and atrocities under other systems. The Inquisition is barely a weeks worth of executions during the holocaust for instance.

>>15491177
>Have you read the Bible.

Yes, and there's some nice stuff in there, but it's mostly bad and I suspect you know this. Even the good stuff ends up getting misinterpreted and used as justification for violence.

>Doesn't sound like it would catch on.

Christianity started this way, because all human religions start this way. Then people anthropomorphise this vague feeling of mystery and turn it into a pantheon of beings. Then (in the case of Abrahamic religions) they combine the pantheon into a single being. A being who displays humanity's worst traits. That's when the trouble starts.

>You're pretending to be god and laying down the law.

I am not God. I'm a person and I'm telling you that you're signed up to something that's hurt a lot of people, especially it's adherents. There are many examples. Why do you only care about the words of a thing no man has ever seen? And stories which nobody can verify? Why don't you care about the words of somebody who's real. And a history of violence which is well documented?

>Saying 'live to be the 'best' person you can be' is meaningless

No, it's mutable. That's why it's a good statement. There is no universal man and a lot of people have been hurt by assuming there is (you, yourself mentioned Communism.) Unless you're a natural born criminal, there is something you can do, something that can make the world a better place. This world. Focus on this rather then looking forward to death and hoping you've picked the right answer so that you get to go up instead of down.

>You literally said I'm supposed to worship a god that doesn't encourage me to get angry

Get angry because of real things. Don't get angry over two people speculating over a scrapbook of Ancient Middle Eastern texts. This is why Christianity leads people down a bad road. Once you start caring more about what might be then what is, you stop caring about the real consequences of your actions. What if the Bible tells you to kill some harmless person because they're not doing what it says? As it has so many times before to so many people. It might not get that bad, but there's a good chance that damn book is going to cause some harm to you and real, tangible people in your life.

>>15491219
>No, I haven't. If I did, then I would leave
Lies
>More refutations...
No they aren't. Do you even speak english anon?
>anything presented here is better than Biblical Christianity.
This is precisely what i think. I could throw a rock in this thread and hit a better system than biblical christianity.
> The world suffered the worst tragedies and atrocities under other systems.
Pure cope. That's a matter of scale. They were also christian in most cases so you can't pretend that you had nothing to do with it.
>Inb4 no true christian.
What about the pedophilia? Can't cope there. Literally no other system has allowed legal pedophilia for an excess of 1000 years. Prove me wrong.
>Inb4 you ignore the pedophilia
I'll ask again so you can't pretend to not notice it.
What about the pedophilia? Can't cope there. Literally no other system has allowed legal pedophilia for almost 2000 years. Prove me wrong.
Did you get that? You allowed pedophilia for 2000 years. Legally.

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE I'M NOT PROJECTING MY MORALITY ONTO THE BIBLE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE MUH HURT

>>15491184
>Did you even read? None of them are requirements you fucking pleb. I never said people MUST socialize or engage in communal projects did i? That's a rhetorical question by the way because i didn't.
>That's your religion that does that.
Then what are the requirements? Because from where I'm sitting, people are congregating into three camps. The communists/progressives, the facists/altright, and the religious/liberal camp. So people do all the things you said BECAUSE they believe in communism, or BECAUSE they believe in protecting the their race, or BECAUSE they believe in Christ/religion. So what is your system?
>Have you ever read a history book?
>Witch hunts, inquisitions, holy wars, rampant poverty. People used to be condemned to death because illnesses were demons. Antibiotics weren't a recommended treatment.
More refutations. Things were worse under communism/fascism. The only thing you mentioned that even possibly stands up to the 20th century was the Crusades in the 12th century, which I looked it up, doesn't even stack up to the holocaust. ~6 million dead in 100 years of Crusades. 6 million Jews executed in the span of a few years during WW2.

>>15491261
>Yes, and there's some nice stuff in there, but it's mostly bad and I suspect you know this. Even the good stuff ends up getting misinterpreted and used as justification for violence.
What's bad and more importantly why is it bad? Are you a utilitarian? Kantian? What is your system of morality? "Just be nice" That's not a coherent system.
>Christianity started this way, because all human religions start this way. Then people anthropomorphise this vague feeling of mystery and turn it into a pantheon of beings. Then (in the case of Abrahamic religions) they combine the pantheon into a single being. A being who displays humanity's worst traits. That's when the trouble starts.
That may be how religions started in Europe, the Middle East, and India, but there are many other forms of religion which did not begin like this.
>I am not God. I'm a person and I'm telling you that you're signed up to something that's hurt a lot of people, especially it's adherents. There are many examples. Why do you only care about the words of a thing no man has ever seen? And stories which nobody can verify? Why don't you care about the words of somebody who's real. And a history of violence which is well documented?
Because what's the alternative? Communism? Fascism? So far I've only heard "SpAcE BrO" and "Just be a good person dude. What are you a retard?"
>No, it's mutable. That's why it's a good statement. There is no universal man and a lot of people have been hurt by assuming there is (you, yourself mentioned Communism.) Unless you're a natural born criminal, there is something you can do, something that can make the world a better place. This world. Focus on this rather then looking forward to death and hoping you've picked the right answer so that you get to go up instead of down.
And the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
>Get angry because of real things. Don't get angry over two people speculating over a scrapbook of Ancient Middle Eastern texts. This is why Christianity leads people down a bad road. Once you start caring more about what might be then what is, you stop caring about the real consequences of your actions. What if the Bible tells you to kill some harmless person because they're not doing what it says? As it has so many times before to so many people. It might not get that bad, but there's a good chance that damn book is going to cause some harm to you and real, tangible people in your life.
So what leads people down a good road? What is your system? And don't just tell me "Just be a good person bro. What are you a retard? lol"

>>15491297
>So what is your system?
How about common decency and respect for individual freedoms while allowing the pursuit of personal enlightenment, spiritual or otherwise, without persecuting others.
>More refutations
This has no meaning when you say it. You don't even know what you're saying at this point and think it's just a magic shield that deflects things you don't like.
>Things were worse under communism/fascism.
Neither removed religious influence only diminished it a little.
>The only thing you mentioned that even possibly stands up to the 20th century was the Crusades in the 12th century
Per capita and during the entire course of their history religion has killed more.
How can you even argue that a book demanding the death of adulterers and which calls to worship a being who commanded the death of infants morally sound?
If you're unbaptized you suffer eternally right? How is that comparable to the holocaust in your head?
Even assuming there was no such thing as abortions, miscarriages happen.

>>15491275
>Lies
Why do you think I'm even here? I'm participating in a dialectic.
>No they aren't. Do you even speak english anon?
They are. "christcucks" "poltards" "conspiracyfags" these are all positions you are critiquing as bad by calling them funny names.
>This is precisely what i think. I could throw a rock in this thread and hit a better system than biblical christianity.
What system? "SpAcE BrO"? lmfao
>Pure cope. That's a matter of scale. They were also christian in most cases so you can't pretend that you had nothing to do with it.
They were all clearly going against the teachings of the Bible. 'Pray for your enemies, and do good to those who persecute you.' Does that sound like a holocaust endorsement? Or does 'Protect the white race' sound more like a holocaust endorsement?
>What about the pedophilia? Can't cope there. Literally no other system has allowed legal pedophilia for an excess of 1000 years. Prove me wrong.
I don't support the Catholic church because there are better systems, mainly Protestant ones. Not perfect either, but better.

>>15491339
>What's bad?
Here's the hard part, you have to use your own judgement. Look at the examples of 'moral systems' that have cropped up in this thread (Christianity, Communism, Nazism, Facism) they all lead to violence and bloodshed and we all know that was wrong. We didn't need a holy book or one-thousand page thesis, we just knew it was wrong. People got along just fine before all these system were invented, we all know killings bad, we all know rape and theft and assault and many other things are bad. The other stuff is just being polite. This might not sound like a satisfying answer, but believe me. You need to live your life, you don't get a strategy guide and you don't need one. Because sooner or later you're going to run into something the author didn't anticipate and that guide is going to be a millstone. Look at the molestation scandal in the church, the book is telling you to play that down and keep following the church for the greater good. Other people are using their own judgement and they know it's wrong, without any propositional calculus to tell them why.

>That may be how religions started in Europe, the Middle East, and India

I can't think of any counter examples, as far as I know it's animism/pantheism and then onto polytheism most religions stop there.

>And the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I don't wish to insult your religion, but step outside the culture that we live in and think about this from an outside point of view. You're in a doomsday cult, with a history of violence. The position your in now, is almost as bad as it gets, almost any move will take you to a better place.

>So what leads people down a good road?

Judging your actions by there consequences, rather then how well they match with a set of rules; one half of which was primarily written in the Iron age and the other half of which was written by a doomsday cult. I've played the ideology game myself and it's a dead end. Nobody can predict where your life is going, not some guys in Ancient Canaan, not some guy in 18th century Europe. You don't need to over complicate this. There was a time when only a a few thousand people were following that book and look at the good it did them. The rest of the world (which didn't have anything but laws and individual judgement to guide it) was flourishing, that should tell you something.

I’ve never read the Bibble. Someone redpill me on where it encourages holy wars.

>>15491400
Here's one of many, Psalm 137:

>8 O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us.

>9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth
thy little ones against the stones.

If you're into history, that's a piece of propaganda written in Judea to encourage war against Judea's neighbor, Babylon. If you're into religion that's the word of the one true God and Babylon is whatever you want it to be. Usually any group you don't like. Either way, pretty stuff indeed, to be called the word of God.

>>15488378
>Believing in only one God
>Not believing in all Gods

It's like you've never even heard of Pascals Wager

>>15491399
You're a total utilitarian nihilist fag. You're just basing morality on what the majority want. To be consistent you need to create a app that is constantly available to everyone in which they can answer a survey on how humans should conduct themselves and be able to change their answer. Also what gives you the right to force your morality on people who disagree?

>>15491363
>How about common decency and respect for individual freedoms while allowing the pursuit of personal enlightenment, spiritual or otherwise, without persecuting others.
So how the fuck can you critique God when that is literally the system we have now?? All of human history has led up to this moment, and you have nothing to make it better, yet you refute that history? What drug are you on?
>This has no meaning when you say it. You don't even know what you're saying at this point and think it's just a magic shield that deflects things you don't like.
It has meaning. That meaning is just going over your head apparently. You are literally refuting Christianity by saying we should've discovered antibiotics sooner. That we could have discovered antibiotics sooner if this other system was in place. And yet you provide no alternative. I ask again. What is the alternative? Communism? Fascism?
>Neither removed religious influence only diminished it a little.
You are delusional if you think the 20th century was motivated by religious ideology. The Crusades? Sure. The purging of inferior races? No, absolutely not.
>Per capita and during the entire course of their history religion has killed more.
I respectfully disagree.
>How can you even argue that a book demanding the death of adulterers and which calls to worship a being who commanded the death of infants morally sound?
You still don't get it. Jesus literally said, "he who is without sin cast the first stone."
And yet unborn babies are slaughtered every day under a system I imagine you condone.
>If you're unbaptized you suffer eternally right? How is that comparable to the holocaust in your head?
>Even assuming there was no such thing as abortions, miscarriages happen.
Christ said the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to little children(baby/toddler). And he also said you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven unless you become like a little child. The whole idea that innocent children go to hell is not biblical.

>>15491435
Thanks

>>15491460
>You're a total utilitarian nihilist fag.

No, because there is a lot things which are socially acceptable, that I would never approve of. Calling people 'fags' for example, is fine by common consensus here, but I think it's beneath my station.

>You're just basing morality on what the majority want

That's not what I'm doing. But that is what religion does. You can justify anything with the Bible and what's justified depends on what's in.
Within the lifetime of people who are still alive today the church preached that homosexuality was an abomination, because that's what the lawmakers said. Today, that's not what the lawmakers say, so suddenly, there's a lot more focus on "Let he who is without sin.." and a lot less focus on Leviticus.

>Also what gives you the right to force your morality on people who disagree?

The beauty of my moral system, is that it's not universal. So I can tolerate dissent, I can't force my opinions on morality on anybody and believe me, I wouldn't if I could. I'm telling you Christianity is a bad system because nobody knows if the good parts are real (Heaven, etc...) but the bad parts (intolerance, violence, suppression of inconvenient facts) is defiantly real. That's just fact. I can't stop a guy from joining a cult, but I can tell him what I know about cults an let him decide for himself. If he want's to throw his life away, I'll be sad, but I'm not going to force him to do anything.

>>15491388
>I'm participating in a dialectic.
You're not, you're just refuting anything you can't argue with by saying "more refutations"
>calling them funny names.
see
>What system? "SpAcE BrO"? lmfao

>They were all clearly going against the teachings of the Bible.
No true scotsman fallacy.
>mainly Protestant ones
More scotsman fallacy, also incorrect to say pedophilia isn't rampant in the protestant church as well. The bible was a rationalizing and a tool behind all of this. Are you arguing it can never be abused in such a way again? That the bible is purely a source of goodwill and grace?
>inb4 if used correctly
That's the argument everyone else is making about communism or fascism, it just wasn't used right. Meanwhile you conveniently ignore anything proposed that isn't blatant extremism. As if you can't worship who you want and let others do the same or else the whole world will never progress. It is almost as if you're ignoring the thousands of years of suppression your holy book was used primary tool for. Oh and let's not forget the fucking pedophilia which you just sweep under the rug as per usual of a christian confronted with the truth about their phenomenon. Those rose tinted glasses are seeming pretty nice about now. I can molest kids and be rewarded with eternal happiness? How lovely. As long as it's little girls and not boys though? Oh and animals don't have souls? So i can just kill them and torture them, nothing wrong there? Sorry if my vulgarity is offensive, i've yet to mention an irredeemable sin. Not believing? Not being baptized? *GASP* That's worse than sodomizing the children?
>Protip you're doing protestantism wrong.

>>15491504
if you admit people can have differing opinions on morality you criticizing the bible for being "bad" means nothing. Also what are you going to do if someone does something you don't like because they disagree with you?

>>15490295
>He is God. Who are you?
Are you White because sound you like some maffia or terrorist type.

>>15491540
> Oh and let's not forget the fucking pedophilia which you just sweep under the rug as per usual of a christian confronted with the truth about their phenomenon.

It’s not like if the Bible is at fault for this, Christian morality is obviously opposed to this. Pedophilia is a rampant in any organization that involves kids. Boy Scouts of America’s, schools, etc.

>>15489909
T. Has never read the Bible or only has read quotes from atheist sources.

>>15491550
He already said his system isn’t universal and he wouldn’t impose it on other people.

>>15491399
>Here's the hard part, you have to use your own judgement. Look at the examples of 'moral systems' that have cropped up in this thread (Christianity, Communism, Nazism, Facism) they all lead to violence and bloodshed and we all know that was wrong. We didn't need a holy book or one-thousand page thesis, we just knew it was wrong. People got along just fine before all these system were invented, we all know killings bad, we all know rape and theft and assault and many other things are bad. The other stuff is just being polite. This might not sound like a satisfying answer, but believe me. You need to live your life, you don't get a strategy guide and you don't need one. Because sooner or later you're going to run into something the author didn't anticipate and that guide is going to be a millstone. Look at the molestation scandal in the church, the book is telling you to play that down and keep following the church for the greater good. Other people are using their own judgement and they know it's wrong, without any propositional calculus to tell them why.
Wow I am just shocked at this. We don't need rules or laws because everyone already knows what's good and bad. What kind of fairytale land are you living in?

>I can't think of any counter examples, as far as I know it's animism/pantheism and then onto polytheism most religions stop there.
Animism and pantheism are two. Shinto is another religion which is different from animism and pantheism. The Japanese also revered their Emperor as a living god. There is Taoism which is quite different, and Confucianism which is also quite different. Most of these systems have given way to either communism or our current liberal system which is essentially a developed form of Christianity.
>I don't wish to insult your religion, but step outside the culture that we live in and think about this from an outside point of view. You're in a doomsday cult, with a history of violence. The position your in now, is almost as bad as it gets, almost any move will take you to a better place.
This is like saying, let's go outside of space or let's go before time. There is no outside of space or before time. You cannot step outside of the culture you live without creating a new culture to inhabit.
>Judging your actions by there consequences, rather then how well they match with a set of rules; one half of which was primarily written in the Iron age and the other half of which was written by a doomsday cult. I've played the ideology game myself and it's a dead end. Nobody can predict where your life is going, not some guys in Ancient Canaan, not some guy in 18th century Europe. You don't need to over complicate this.
So Utilitarianism. Got it. Have you done any research on utilitarianism?

>>15491550

>if you admit people can have differing opinions on morality you criticizing the bible for being "bad" means nothing.

There's a limit to what can be tolerated and we all know it. The Bible has inspired murder, war and numerous secret conspiracies and that's me being generous to the Bible and downplaying things. That's why we don't need it, anybody who looks at the history of this book knows it's bad, unless you have a severe personality disorder (very severe like Charles Manson) or you've been lied to about it you know it's evil. We all know evil when it's flagrant enough we don't need a thousand, contradictory, over-specific laws to tell us.

>Also what are you going to do if someone does something you don't like because they disagree with you?

Most of the time, polite disagreement, even when the other party isn't being polite. If it's something severe like murder, then it's a job for the Police.

>>15490237
Lol, God gave you life and he can take it away. You think your entitled to immortality?

>Inb4 God can't take my life
Death only exists because of God. You don't die on your own accord but he has appointed a time for all people to die.

>>15491463
>when that is literally the system we have now??
Only just implemented and already you want to take it away.
>You are literally refuting Christianity by saying we should've discovered antibiotics sooner.
Fucking precisely.
>And yet you provide no alternative.
You've been provided multiple examples and gave some of your own.
A lack of religious authority is the common denominator. Get that through your thick skull.
>20th century was motivated by religious ideology.
Never said it. I said they weren't void of religious influence.
>I respectfully disagree.
Fact has nothing to do with opinion.
>You still don't get it. Jesus literally said, "he who is without sin cast the first stone."
Yet it is too often not the case. You being a prime example. See below
>And yet unborn babies are slaughtered every day under a system I imagine you condone.
What do you "imagine" i condone. You're system has been killing babies for thousands of years, born and unborn. Refusing rites as a matter of punishment while claiming no one has the right to judge a soul but god.
>The whole idea that innocent children go to hell is not biblical.
Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of god
But nothing unclean will ever enter it, nor anyone who does what is detestable or false, but only those who are written in the Lamb's book of life.
Hold most firmly and never doubt that, not only adults with the use of reason but also children who either begin to live in the womb of their mothers and who die there or, already born from their mothers, pass from this world without the Sacrament of Holy Baptism, which is given in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, must be punished with the endless penalty of eternal fire. Even if they have no sin from their own actions, still, by their carnal conception and birth, they have contracted the damnation of Original Sin.

>>15491610
Why would want to worship a god like this? Why does he need to be worshipped? Why is living a virtuous life not good enough?

>>15491587

>We don't need rules or laws because everyone already knows what's good and bad.

Slow down. We need laws and we have laws because everybody knows what's wrong, unless they're messed up either by the indoctrination or nature. You won't find a country which carries the death penalty for anything other then murder, treason or piracy, for example. Unless you're looking at the religious ones.

>Animism and pantheism

I'm no expert on anthropology, so I'll take your word on that. But I strongly disagree with the idea that "Christianity" is the foundation of anybody's moral code, as I said, you can justify anything with that book. It's the people who cherrypick the quotations who really decide.

>This is like saying, let's go outside of space

No it isn't I was raised in Christendom and I can see what Christanity really looks like with it's mask off. Anthropologists step outside of their own culture and look at things from a neutral perspective everyday.

>So Utilitarianism.

Nein. Utilitarianism is about judging social policy by how it affects the majority. I'm talking about day-to-day life, not law. Unless you're a Policeman, a Soldier, a Doctor, A legislator or some other kind of highly specialised professional, you're never going to be in a position where you have to weigh in on a heavyweight issue of morality. If you are, no moral system is going to help you, because they're all too rigid, that's their problem. Most of the moral issues you're going to face in life are going to be social dilemmas, and you can figure them out on your own, far better then any ideology can.

>>15491540
>You're not, you're just refuting anything you can't argue with by saying "more refutations"
You can't refute a refutation. If someone refutes Christianity, I am well within my rights to demand they provide their system. If they don't then they have no ground to stand on whatsoever (verses Christianity which isn't perfect ground but at least it's still ground to stand on)
>calling them funny names.
>see
>What system? "SpAcE BrO"? lmfao
Nothing wrong with calling an idea a funny name. I already provided a better refutation of the 'space bro' idea though.
>No true scotsman fallacy.
Are you serious? No, really, are you kidding me?
>More scotsman fallacy, also incorrect to say pedophilia isn't rampant in the protestant church as well. The bible was a rationalizing and a tool behind all of this. Are you arguing it can never be abused in such a way again? That the bible is purely a source of goodwill and grace?
Who the fuck is the true scotsman then? All you're doing is refuting Christianity.
This is you:
>Christianity bad
Okay, what is your system?
>Christianity full of pedos
Okay, so what would you suggest we replace it with?
>Christianity is full of bad people
Okay, so what do you want people to worship instead?
>Bible bad
This is going nowhere.

>That's the argument everyone else is making about communism or fascism, it just wasn't used right. Meanwhile you conveniently ignore anything proposed that isn't blatant extremism. As if you can't worship who you want and let others do the same or else the whole world will never progress. It is almost as if you're ignoring the thousands of years of suppression your holy book was used primary tool for. Oh and let's not forget the fucking pedophilia which you just sweep under the rug as per usual of a christian confronted with the truth about their phenomenon. Those rose tinted glasses are seeming pretty nice about now. I can molest kids and be rewarded with eternal happiness? How lovely. As long as it's little girls and not boys though? Oh and animals don't have souls? So i can just kill them and torture them, nothing wrong there? Sorry if my vulgarity is offensive, i've yet to mention an irredeemable sin. Not believing? Not being baptized? *GASP* That's worse than sodomizing the children?
Are you supporting communism or fascism then? Because if you are then maybe we could actually get a good conversation going for once on this fucking board.

>>15491610
>God gave you life and he can take it away

Let's find out: God, you ugly swine, Jesus isn't your kid. With the way "Virgin" Mary put it about. I wouldn't be surprised if everybody in Bethlehem was a candidate. If that doesn't get him to push my timetable forward by several decades, I don't know what will. I'll contact you later with the results of the experiment.

>>15491577
>It’s not like if the Bible is at fault for this,
Holy fucking cope. You have more than any other organization in the world and actively protect them while putting children at risk by raising your clergy above suspicion regularly.
Not to mention the massive amounts of money you have means your pedophiles enjoy some of the heaviest protection you can pay for via bribes, lawyers etc. Even the catholic church will step in and help other denominations.
If you actually wanted to discuss things and were willing to admit your faults like the rest of us i might be able to maintain a discussion about this but as it stand you're just denying anyone else can do good and simultaneously denying your organization can do bad all while protecting the pedophilia phenomenon in ALL of christendom by saying "other people do it".
Some of your clergies pedophilia rates reach 90% in some countries.
Over 70% of cases occured in the usa. Almost a quarter of which were children under 11 years old.
>TL;DR Stop advocating an organization that protects pedophilia while trying to denounce anyone else.
I'm done with this nonsense pedophile shill. Keep your religion to yourself and stop pretending it's for the benefit of mankind. The only benefactor is your penis.

>>15491622
>Only just implemented and already you want to take it away.
What are you talking about? This is the system Christianity developed. Freedom of religion was only developed due to the Protestant Reformation.
>Fucking precisely.
>And yet you provide no alternative.
>You've been provided multiple examples and gave some of your own.
>A lack of religious authority is the common denominator. Get that through your thick skull.
So you're saying communism or fascism is the answer? Can you just admit you are a communist or a fascist instead of playing this ring-around-the-rosey game?
>Yet it is too often not the case. You being a prime example. See below
I don't understand what you're saying here.
>What do you "imagine" i condone. You're system has been killing babies for thousands of years, born and unborn. Refusing rites as a matter of punishment while claiming no one has the right to judge a soul but god.
I imagine you condone abortion. If you don't, then tell me. Communists generally condone abortion.
And it's sad to say, but we still haven't progressed out of the system which condones killing innocent babies.
>Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of god But nothing unclean will ever enter it, nor anyone who does what is detestable or false, but only those who are written in the Lamb's book of life. Hold most firmly and never doubt that, not only adults with the use of reason but also children who either begin to live in the womb of their mothers and who die there or, already born from their mothers, pass from this world without the Sacrament of Holy Baptism, which is given in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, must be punished with the endless penalty of eternal fire. Even if they have no sin from their own actions, still, by their carnal conception and birth, they have contracted the damnation of Original Sin.
Salvation is not achieved through works but faith alone.
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy, He saved us.
For by grace are you saved, through faith, and that not of ourselves, it is the gift of God. Not of works lest any man should boast.
For instance, the thief on the cross next to Jesus was saved through his faith alone. He was not baptized. When Jesus speaks of water and Spirit, he is not referring to baptism.

>>15491691
I’m an atheist. I’m not even the other guy you’re arguing with.

>>15491399
>. People got along just fine before all these system were invented
You have no idea how unbelievably violent the ancient world was.
>we all know rape and theft and assault and many other things are bad.
You are incredibly naive,
and a nave. blessed with your privilege of living in a stable area. You are the type that think immigration is fine because "people are decent everywhere ,
the majority of humans living today and the vast majority in history are fine with rape and thief and assault

>>15490678
correction god created this scenerio and made man do evil because he hath control over his clay. I like this god I believe in christian god because is rock hard cock causes as much suffering as he can and he enjoys it

>>15490846
we need to make it exciting and say god likes to fuck aliens and he wants man to die at mars worshipping his sons sexy feet. were all inventing this shit as we go anyways right so might as well make gooodly goo do whatever we want

>>15490964
God is promoting pedophilia through the catholic church so my plan so save all children from getting fucked in the ass is getting waylayed by god

>>15488378
>"if God real why bad thing happen?"
I would also add
Hebrew 12

God exists via His grace, and subsists beyond all.

God answers to prayer upon the realized limits of one's noble potential.

The spirits and/or souls of all entities that are possessed of nobility are protected, and guided, by the Holy Spirit - in this existence, and beyond it.

>>15491741
>You have no idea how unbelievably violent the ancient world was.

I don't wish to sound insulting, but please, humour me, pretend the Bible's not a primary source and read some secular history books. It's not nearly as bad as what Europe became under Christian rule or what the Middle East is like, today; all because of that book.

>You are incredibly naive,

I know the rest of the world is messed up. For whatever reason, we in the West got-off lucky. As I said, I'm not a God, I'm not a philosopher I can't make the people in East Africa behave like the people in Scotland. Smarter men then us have tried their hardest, with the backing of some of the most powerful people on Earth and they've gotten nowhere. But it's not our moral duty, we're just two guys, we're not Civil Servants in the British Empire, it's not our job to solve all mankind's problems. Worry about the things that you can change, not eternal problems that no man in all of history has managed to solve.

>>15491639
>Slow down. We need laws and we have laws because everybody knows what's wrong, unless they're messed up either by the indoctrination or nature. You won't find a country which carries the death penalty for anything other then murder, treason or piracy, for example. Unless you're looking at the religious ones.
French Revolution executed plenty of people for petty reasons. Stalin executed or shipped tons of people off to Siberia.
You know this really stinks of Kantian ethics. We already know right from wrong because it's built into our cognition, a priori. Is this where you're coming from?
>I'm no expert on anthropology, so I'll take your word on that. But I strongly disagree with the idea that "Christianity" is the foundation of anybody's moral code, as I said, you can justify anything with that book. It's the people who cherrypick the quotations who really decide.
Christ refuted the Old Testament, so any Old Testament passages you bring up are only useful for instruction but are not strictly enforceable. The New Testament does not, and I repeat, absolutely no where says to kill people because of their sin. In fact the complete opposite is true. There is nothing to cherrypick.
>No it isn't I was raised in Christendom and I can see what Christianity really looks like with it's mask off. Anthropologists step outside of their own culture and look at things from a neutral perspective everyday.
You are delusional if you think there is a 'neutral' perspective. We are all biased and our history informs our beliefs and decisions. Since you were raised in Christendom, you are absolutely a product of Christianity.
>Nein. Utilitarianism is about judging social policy by how it affects the majority. I'm talking about day-to-day life, not law. Unless you're a Policeman, a Soldier, a Doctor, A legislator or some other kind of highly specialised professional, you're never going to be in a position where you have to weigh in on a heavyweight issue of morality. If you are, no moral system is going to help you, because they're all too rigid, that's their problem. Most of the moral issues you're going to face in life are going to be social dilemmas, and you can figure them out on your own, far better then any ideology can.
Still utilitarianism. There are different forms of utilitarianism. Do more research about what you believe before you engage in a discussion of this nature.

And what the fuck are you talking about? 'you're never going to be in a position where you have to weigh in on a heavyweight issue of morality' Do you not know what VOTING is?

>>15488487
Ahura Mazda is omnibenevolent but not omnipotent. However, when he finally triumphs over Ahriman, then he will become omnipotent. Zoroastrianism begins with a ditheism but it is prophesied it will end a monotheism with Ahura Mazda reigning supreme.

>>15489909
yet all the laws in society and what you see as good is deprived from this book.

>>15491807
>is deprived from this book.
Ten commandments are egyptian.

>>15491780
>I don't wish to sound insulting, but please, humour me, pretend the Bible's not a primary source and read some secular history books. It's not nearly as bad as what Europe became under Christian rule or what the Middle East is like, today; all because of that book.

Did you somehow forget that pre-Christian Rome existed? Or Greece? The constant wars in China, the Mongols, Japanese Empire, Aztecs.

>>15491752
They would be pedophiles anyway. Instead of being clergy, they would be filming and distributing child porn. The point is, how do you change a person?

>>15491788

>French Revolution executed plenty of people for petty reasons

No, Common law, a practical, boring, limited, arrived at by trial and error. It makes no claim to solve all the moral problems of mankind, but it's worked for centuries. I don't like systems of moral philosophy, religious or secular; because they're too rigid to deal in a reasonable manner with the slightest unexpected event, then bloodshed starts.

>Christ refuted the Old Testament

I've heard this tune before. When you don't want to follow the Old Testament, Christ abrogated it. When you do want to follow it, it's still valid.

>You are delusional if you think there is a 'neutral' perspective.

Because I heard one or two stories of Jesus (and my teacher did tell me they were only stories) along with Beowulf, Thor's journey to Jotunheim, The Fish of Knowledge and countless Greek and Roman myths, I'm a product of Christianity? Am I not also a product of Celtic Paganism, Graeco-Roman polytheism and Norse Paganism? Christianity got as much air-time in my school as all the other major world religions and far less then Greek myths. I didn't even read a single word of the Old Testament until I was a teenager.

>Still utilitarianism.

If you say so.

>Do you not know what VOTING is?

Yes, I vote for a guy who makes nice promises and then he reneges on them. It's pointless but I still feel I have to do it and I don't think any system of morality is going to help me in that voting booth. Jesus wasn't very vocal on the topic of Public smoking legislation.

>>15491814
>Instead of being clergy, they would be filming and distributing child porn.
>We're doing good, it would be way worse if we didn't protect the pedophiles or give them hunting grounds and the tools to lure and deceive naive victims.

>>15491812

>Did you somehow forget that pre-Christian Rome existed? Or Greece?

Defiantly not, fine places they were, far nicer then the Dark Ages.

>>15490339
Want to know how I know you're a socialist? You don't understand supply and demand.

>>15491834
Food wastage

>>15491834
I voted for the Brexit party at the last election, not that it's any of your business.

>>15490339
You're supporting animal cruelty by eating meat when you don't have to anon, you're no better than a dog rapist or someone who stomps on puppies for fun. I mean this sincerely.

>>15491832
You are aware that the concept of the Dark Ages has mostly been abandoned by historians right?

>>15491839
Dif anon

>>15491834
Makes no difference. They already produce way too much beef, they literally throw away what they don’t sell.

>>15491841
I did the whole 'vegetarian' thing when I was a teenager, made me sick. I do not regret my reversion to carnivore behaviour.

>>15491843
Let's not make this into one of those pedantic debates where you point to some marginalia as proof that the art world was flourishing and I point to some crude looking architecture as proof that civilisation as we know it was dead. We've raised enough heavy-weight questions for one thread.

>>15491841
Animals have no souls according to the bible. We can skin them alive if we want to. They are here for our use.
>no dogs go to heaven

>>15491827
>No, Common law, a practical, boring, limited, arrived at by trial and error. It makes no claim to solve all the moral problems of mankind, but it's worked for centuries. I don't like systems of moral philosophy, religious or secular; because they're too rigid to deal in a reasonable manner with the slightest unexpected event, then bloodshed starts.
Common law? So judges and police are kings and rulers then. Sounds like a police state.
>I've heard this tune before. When you don't want to follow the Old Testament, Christ abrogated it. When you do want to follow it, it's still valid.
Christ refuted the Old Testament, full stop
Anyone who brings up any laws from Leviticus, you just reply 'he without sin cast the first stone.' That's all you need to say. Christians who use Leviticus laws to justify anything don't even understand their own religion.
>Because I heard one or two stories of Jesus (and my teacher did tell me they were only stories) along with Beowulf, Thor's journey to Jotunheim, The Fish of Knowledge and countless Greek and Roman myths, I'm a product of Christianity? Am I not also a product of Celtic Paganism, Graeco-Roman polytheism and Norse Paganism? Christianity got as much air-time in my school as all the other major world religions and far less then Greek myths. I didn't even read a single word of the Old Testament until I was a teenager.
You are a product of so much more than the simple stories you were told as a child. There is a vast progression of humanity which culminates in you, the human being, here and now. If you lived in another point in history, you would have been a completely different person with an extremely different view and ideology.

This includes the apparent self-hatred you have of your own history and culture. There is no reason to refute modern liberal Christianity without providing something better UNLESS you are simply full of self-hatred.
>Yes, I vote for a guy who makes nice promises and then he reneges on them. It's pointless but I still feel I have to do it and I don't think any system of morality is going to help me in that voting booth. Jesus wasn't very vocal on the topic of Public smoking legislation.
You can't help but bring a system of morality into the voting booth. Clearly you still don't get it.

>>15491873
>Anyone who brings up any laws from Leviticus, you just reply 'he without sin cast the first stone.' That's all you need to say. Christians who use Leviticus laws to justify anything don't even understand their own religion.
That doesn't stop people practicing evil in it's name.
Buddhism probably works better.

>>15491877
It has its problems too, but I generally like what I see in regards to eastern Buddhism.

What would be interesting is a synthesis of modern Christianity and modern Buddhism. That would be a sight to behold.

>>15491873
>Sounds like a police state.

If that's your spin on it, it worked fine for many centuries. Far better then any of these grand experiments in Utopian thinking.

>You are a product of so much more than the simple stories you were told as a child.

Everything you've said is valid, but the influence of Christianity on my life was so minor, I think it's safe to say it was drowned out by other influences. Whenever there is a dispute between the church and the government, I have never found myself taking the church's position.

>This includes the apparent self-hatred you have of your own history and culture.

I love my country. Damn you for saying otherwise. Rule Britannia.

>There is no reason to refute modern liberal Christianity without providing something better

It's useless except when it's in the way. I don't give a damn if homosexuals can marry or where they marry. When the legislation was tabled and the Church raised a fuss, I didn't care either way. When the law passed it but the Church insisted on dragging their feet, I didn't care. Then when the church caved I continued not caring. They ended up at the same place as the rest of us, they just made a lot of noise on the way there.

>you are simply full of self-hatred.

I'm still not understanding, what part of myself or my country am I supposed to hate?

>You can't help but bring a system of morality into the voting booth.

I have a moral compass, I do not need a 'moral code'. Moral compasses are developed by living human beings (excepting the mental ill, of course) 'Moral Codes' are made by crackpots from many years ago and usually cause more harm then good.

>>15491913
>If that's your spin on it, it worked fine for many centuries. Far better then any of these grand experiments in Utopian thinking.
Nothing is perfect in this world, and as far as I'm aware, all modern governments issue written laws and have some sort of constitution. Having no written law to guide judges and police would be an inferior system in my view.
>Everything you've said is valid, but the influence of Christianity on my life was so minor, I think it's safe to say it was drowned out by other influences. Whenever there is a dispute between the church and the government, I have never found myself taking the church's position.
You are like a baby standing on the head of a giant so large, you think it is solid ground.
>It's useless except when it's in the way. I don't give a damn if homosexuals can marry or where they marry. When the legislation was tabled and the Church raised a fuss, I didn't care either way. When the law passed it but the Church insisted on dragging their feet, I didn't care. Then when the church caved I continued not caring. They ended up at the same place as the rest of us, they just made a lot of noise on the way there.
Just go to church, dude. You might find that you are enjoying yourself for once.
>I have a moral compass, I do not need a 'moral code'. Moral compasses are developed by living human beings (excepting the mental ill, of course) 'Moral Codes' are made by crackpots from many years ago and usually cause more harm then good.
Right so anyone who disagrees with your 'moral compass' is mentally ill and anyone who tries to write down laws are crackpots. I see.

>>15491958
>Nothing is perfect in this world,

The law's arbitrary, the people in charge will do what they want, no matter what an old document says. Look at the American Constitution how much 'reinterpreting' has been done by the Supreme court over the years? They may be following the letter of the law, but the spirit of the law's long gone.

>You are like a baby standing on the head of a giant so large, you think it is solid ground.

I know that there's a lot of subconscious influence in people's life. But I really think Christianity has had a very minor influence compared to other things.

>Just go to church, dude. You might find that you are enjoying yourself for once.

I enjoy myself greatly. I've been to church for weddings and funerals. I've walked about some cathedrals just to see the architecture. I've been to two Catholic masses and one Ethopian Mass. They left no greater impression on me then the time it went to a Jewish service.

>Right so anyone who disagrees with your 'moral compass' is mentally ill

No. There are some things no sane person would defend i.e Rape, Murder, Assualt, Theft and so on. There can be no room for interpretation there. There are a great many other things I believe which I know are relative, I think this is the wise position given the harm caused by people trying to make a perfect society. Look at the unmitigated disaster that was Communism, that all started because some maniac said: "These are not my feelings, they are universal truths."

>>15491986
This has just occurred to me: I also helped paint the inside of a church once because I was bored and all the congregation were about 80 years old, and not in the mood for climbing huge ladders.

>>15491958
>Demonic rites (science as you know it)
>We will always be disgusting, wretched, liars, thiefs, murderers, full of lust and hatred
>the destruction of ourselves is always just
>He would turn our planet into a boiling hell like Venus.
>the absolute state of your reading comprehension.
>responsible for atrocities that are committed all over the world.
>With man, it is impossible, but with God it is possible.
>If you think God is guilty from judging horrible human beings who rape his once beautiful creation, then humanity is truly doomed.
>The true word of God can be found in the Bible, not necessarily in any one person's words.
>yes God is a he you faggot.
>Remember how that turned out? What a fucking joke.
>Meanwhile the earth is dying.
>Only a monster would refute God without having something better prepared, certainly.
>Religious people in America have been the most generous people in the history of the world.
>You can't just rip God from someone's life and expect them to start worshiping space exploration or whatever.
>Your subjective bitching and crying will change nothing
>why the fuck would you refute God?
>SO FUCKING SOLVE THAT SHIT FIRST DUMBASS
>There are times when we, too, fail to recognize the holiness of God, becoming too familiar with Him with an irreverent attitude.
>I don't even know what it means to 'act out'
>Your human reasoning is pathetic, honestly.
>It disgusts me that you think you are even smart enough to solve anything of relative difficulty.
>This is the state of modern atheism.
>Your aim can only succeed if it is grounded in Christ.
>It's the only way real change can happen.
>Doesn't sound like it would catch on.
>You're pretending to be god and laying down the law.
>Why should I even listen to what you're saying?
>We are discussing the ideas right now. What does it look like we're doing?
>I think you're wrong.
>"Just be nice" That's not a coherent system
>So far I've only heard "SpAcE BrO" and "Just be a good person dude. What are you a retard?"
>And the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
>I'm participating in a dialectic.
>What system? "SpAcE BrO"? lmfao
>I don't support the Catholic church because there are better systems, mainly Protestant ones.
>You're a total utilitarian nihilist fag
>how the fuck can you critique God when that is literally the system we have now
>yet you refute that history? What drug are you on?
>I ask again. What is the alternative? Communism? Fascism?
>I respectfully disagree.
>You still don't get it. Jesus literally said, "he who is without sin cast the first stone."
>And yet unborn babies are slaughtered every day under a system I imagine you condone.
KEK
>Be christian
>Take credit for everything
>Take blame for nothing
>Judging intensifies

>>15491958
>What kind of fairytale land are you living in?
>our current liberal system which is essentially a developed form of Christianity.
>If someone refutes Christianity, I am well within my rights to demand they provide their system.
>Are you serious? No, really, are you kidding me?
>Who the fuck is the true scotsman then? All you're doing is refuting Christianity.
>This is going nowhere.
>Are you supporting communism or fascism then?
>Freedom of religion was only developed due to the Protestant Reformation
>So you're saying communism or fascism is the answer?
>Can you just admit you are a communist or a fascist instead of playing this ring-around-the-rosey game?
>I don't understand what you're saying here.
>I imagine you condone abortion. If you don't, then tell me. Communists generally condone abortion.
>And it's sad to say, but we still haven't progressed out of the system which condones killing innocent babies.
>Salvation is not achieved through works but faith alone.
>Not of works lest any man should boast.
>You are incredibly naive, and a nave blessed with your privilege
>You are the type that think immigration is fine
>the majority of humans living today and the vast majority in history are fine with rape and thief and assault
>Since you were raised in Christendom, you are absolutely a product of Christianity.
>Do more research about what you believe before you engage in a discussion of this nature.
>And what the fuck are you talking about?
>They would be pedophiles anyway. Instead of being clergy, they would be filming and distributing child porn.
>Want to know how I know you're a socialist?
>you're no better than a dog rapist or someone who stomps on puppies for fun. I mean this sincerely.
>Sounds like a police state
>don't even understand their own religion.
>the apparent self-hatred you have of your own history and culture.
>you are simply full of self-hatred.
>Clearly you still don't get it.
>You are like a baby standing on the head of a giant so large, you think it is solid ground.
>Just go to church, dude.
>Right so anyone who disagrees with your 'moral compass' is mentally ill and anyone who tries to write down laws are crackpots. I see
NO U

>>15491986
>The law's arbitrary, the people in charge will do what they want, no matter what an old document says. Look at the American Constitution how much 'reinterpreting' has been done by the Supreme court over the years? They may be following the letter of the law, but the spirit of the law's long gone.
It's really not that arbitrary. There is a limit to what judges can do, and there is a process called impeachment if the legislative branch thinks a judge has overstepped.
>I enjoy myself greatly. I've been to church for weddings and funerals. I've walked about some cathedrals just to see the architecture. I've been to two Catholic masses and one Ethopian Mass. They left no greater impression on me then the time it went to a Jewish service.
Catholic mass is different to a Protestant church service. And if you are so out of touch with your own history, then I feel sorry for your loss.
>No. There are some things no sane person would defend i.e Rape, Murder, Assualt, Theft and so on. There can be no room for interpretation there. There are a great many other things I believe which I know are relative, I think this is the wise position given the harm caused by people trying to make a perfect society. Look at the unmitigated disaster that was Communism, that all started because some maniac said: "These are not my feelings, they are universal truths."
>There can be no room for interpretation there.
I seriously disagree. Rape and murder are defined as immoral sex or killing. Theft, assault, killing, and sex can all be justified according to interpretation.

And communism wasn't trying to make a perfect society. They were trying to make a better society. They failed, but you cannot fault them for the effort, and honestly I think the effort was needed. Perhaps it didn't need to be so wide spread though. Perhaps it could have been tried in a smaller country to see if it would work first or not. I don't know. This is just my speculation. Perhaps it was simply impossible because of the general zeitgeist surrounding communism.

>>15492003
lol I didn't say all of that.

>>15491063
>Why does God want people to fear him?
For the unbeliever, the fear of God is the fear of the judgment of God and eternal death, which is eternal separation from God (Luke 12:5; Hebrews 10:31). For the believer, the fear of God is something much different. The believer’s fear is reverence of God. Hebrews 12:28-29 is a good description of this: “Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe, for our ’God is a consuming fire.’” This reverence and awe is exactly what the fear of God means for Christians. This is the motivating factor for us to surrender to the Creator of the Universe.

Proverbs 1:7 declares, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge.” Until we understand who God is and develop a reverential fear of Him, we cannot have true wisdom. True wisdom comes only from understanding who God is and that He is holy, just, and righteous. Deuteronomy 10:12, 20-21 records, “And now, O Israel, what does the LORD your God ask of you but to fear the LORD your God, to walk in all his ways, to love him, to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. Fear the LORD your God and serve him. Hold fast to him and take your oaths in his name. He is your praise; he is your God, who performed for you those great and awesome wonders you saw with your own eyes.” The fear of God is the basis for our walking in His ways, serving Him, and, yes, loving Him.

Some redefine the fear of God for believers to “respecting” Him. While respect is definitely included in the concept of fearing God, there is more to it than that. A biblical fear of God, for the believer, includes understanding how much God hates sin and fearing His judgment on sin—even in the life of a believer. Hebrews 12:5-11 describes God’s discipline of the believer. While it is done in love (Hebrews 12:6), it is still a fearful thing. As children, the fear of discipline from our parents no doubt prevented some evil actions. The same should be true in our relationship with God. We should fear His discipline, and therefore seek to live our lives in such a way that pleases Him.

Believers are not to be scared of God. We have no reason to be scared of Him. We have His promise that nothing can separate us from His love (Romans 8:38-39). We have His promise that He will never leave us or forsake us (Hebrews 13:5). Fearing God means having such a reverence for Him that it has a great impact on the way we live our lives. The fear of God is respecting Him, obeying Him, submitting to His discipline, and worshiping Him in awe.

>>15492023

>It's really not that arbitrary.

Look at what America was intended to be and what it's become. Ultimately, any system will be at the mercy of who's enforcing it. Whatever systems are set up, things will be worked around.

>Catholic mass is different to a Protestant church service.

I didn't want to give Christianity a third go, it failed the first two times.

>And if you are so out of touch with your own history, then I feel sorry for your loss.

There is a grand total of one practising Catholic in my family. My Great-Aunt maintains her Catholicism because she's still angry about the English occupation of Northern Ireland. Everybody else in my family who's been exposed to the benefits of Christianity disdains it greatly. If you stay still long enough, they'll furnish you with stories about crooked priests and abusive Nuns. It is not my history, it's something some members of my family did before I was born out of obligation to Great-Grandparents, who saw religion as an extension of Irish Nationalism.

>Theft, assault, killing, and sex can all be justified according to interpretation.

Well it's a good thing nobody's writing this down, now we can be flexible in reponse to changing circumstances. Rather then submitting to inflexible commandments.

>And communism wasn't trying to make a perfect society

I respectfully disagree, it's Christianity with all of the spiritual elements removed as far as I'm concerned.

>They failed, but you cannot fault them for the effort,

I respectfully disagree, they killed millions.

>Perhaps it could have been tried in a smaller country to see if it would work first or not.

The Communist system is too rigid a moral code. That is, in my opinion, one of it's greatest failings.

>>15492070
I mostly agree with you but I think it's ok to say you can fear God. I think that's the argument God was making against Job. He was saying he was being inconsistent for respecting/fearing the leviathan but not doing the same when it comes to the creator of the world.

>>15492070

>The believer’s fear is reverence of God.

They are separate concepts, why not reverence without fear?

>Until we understand who God is and develop a reverential fear of Him, we cannot have true wisdom.

>True wisdom comes only from understanding who God is

Disagree, Socrates did not fear this particular god. Nor had he ever heard of him.

>A biblical fear of God, for the believer, includes understanding how much God hates sin and fearing His judgement on sin

God can't even keep his own followers in line. I doubt he'll ever get around to the rest of us.

>We should fear His discipline, and therefore seek to live our lives in such a way that pleases Him.

He's a pretty nasty fellow, I'd much rather please flesh and blood people. Best case scenario: It's all real and you end up spending eternity with a God who's always angry, not an appealing prospect.

>Believers are not to be scared of God. We have no reason to be scared of Him.

What? But you said-

>We have His promise that He will never leave us or forsake us

We don't even know if he was here to begin with.

>The fear of God is respecting Him, obeying Him, submitting to His discipline, and worshiping Him in awe.

Sounds like a big commitment, what if he's not real? Then I've done all those appalling things he asked me to do for nothing.

But the real question is: what do you think of my thunder idea? Does that not prove that, I, a mere mortal am smarter and more merciful then this God?

>>15492033
Omg, seriously, you have to teach me how you do this.
>Literally anyone who isn't a christian is a communist, fascist or socialist.
>You simultaneously ignore people while pretending to be discussing things with them.
>You commit hypocrisy every other post while maintaining innocence.
>You constantly shift blame and exclude entire portions of your religion whenever it suits you.
>You call people names and insult them while claiming you respect them.
>You say no-one can speak for god and then proceed to do just that.
How do i christ this hard?

The free will argument doesn't work. In the Bible, God repeatedly manipulates and deceives people just so he can punish them and make them suffer. Free will is simply not an issue as far as the Biblical God is concerned.

Ezekiel 14:9
>9 If a prophet is deceived and speaks a word, I, the LORD, have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand against him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.

1 Samuel 18:10-11
>10 The next day an evil spirit from God rushed upon Saul, and he raved within his house, while David was playing the lyre, as he did day by day. Saul had his spear in his hand; 11 and Saul threw the spear, for he thought, ‘I will pin David to the wall.’ But David eluded him twice. 12 Saul was afraid of David, because the LORD was with him but had departed from Saul.

1 Kings 22:19-23
>19 Then Micaiah said, ‘Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, with all the host of heaven standing beside him to the right and to the left of him. 20 And the LORD said, “Who will entice Ahab, so that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?” Then one said one thing, and another said another, 21 until a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD, saying, “I will entice him.” 22 “How?” the LORD asked him. He replied, “I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.” Then the LORD said, “You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do it.” 23 So you see, the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the LORD has decreed disaster for you.’

>>15492124
lmao all you people can do is refute Christianity and provide no answers of your own.
>you ignore
>you commit hypocrisy
>you shift blame
>you call people names
>you say no one can speak for god
Why don't you say something?
It's easy to burn a house down. It's hard to build one.
All I'm seeing you do is burning a house down. I don't see you building anything.

>>15492162
>TL;DR NO U
I almost fell for it.
Try again, i think i'm getting the hang of it.

>>15491873
>Christ refuted the Old Testament

Matthew 5:17-19
>17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. 18 Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place. 19 Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

>>15492205
>20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
If you obey all of the Old Testament law, you will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever breaks the Old Testament law will be called least. But the way to enter the kingdom of heaven is through Christ.

>>15492244
My point was that Jesus didn't "refute" the Old Testament as that previous post said. Even so, your addition to the Matthew quote doesn't follow, Jesus even tells people to teach the law, which isn't compatible with your interpretation. Jesus' teaching in that verse is totally in line with the Old Testament where the law is described as perfectly possible to obey, see Deuteronomy 30:11-14
>11 Surely, this commandment that I am commanding you today is not too hard for you, nor is it too far away. 12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will go up to heaven for us, and get it for us so that we may hear it and observe it?’ 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will cross to the other side of the sea for us, and get it for us so that we may hear it and observe it?’ 14 No, the word is very near to you; it is in your mouth and in your heart for you to observe.

>>15492281
It is possible to obey the Old Testament law, and the Pharisees were technically following the law, but Christ refuted the Old Testament in that many people thought all they had to do was do good deeds/follow the law and they would get a pass to heaven. When Jesus came along, He said that's all wrong. For instance in Luke 18:
10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’

13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’

14 “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”

This is the refutation: That good deeds, sacrifices, tithing, etc, are at all sufficient for salvation because in reality it is our souls which need cleansing, and that is only something God can do.

So a Jew would say that you're not going to get into heaven (or be resurrected) unless you are circumcised. But Jesus would say it doesn't matter if you're circumcised. What matters is whether or not you have faith in Him.

>>15492368
To expand on this, the people thought that doing good deeds would justify them in the sight of God. The main good deed was sacrificing animals. Your sin, as a Jew, would be covered by the animal sacrifice.

But Christ came along and said, this is insufficient for salvation. This is because Christ was to be the sacrificial lamb that takes away the sin of the world. We have the privilege of seeing this all play out in hindsight, but to a Jewish person living in the first century, it would have been a radical idea, that one doesn't have to follow the law to be saved. The whole law was proven to be something entirely different to what the average Jew thought the law was. Instead of the law being guidelines on how to be saved, the law instead became showing just how hopelessly damned we are.

>>15488843
>faith
>reason
>two sides of the same coin
>checkmate athiests
holy...

>>15488378
It is actually explained in 1 John 2:15

15Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.(the world here is creation after the fall and under the dominion of satan. it is creation no longer oriented toward god, but temporary and dominated by inordinate passions[lk 16:13 “No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon."{jesus calls mammon/riches a master not because wealth is evil by nature, but because of the control it has over people}])For all that is in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—is not of the Father but is of the world.† 17And the world is passing away, and the lust of it; but he who does the will of God abides forever.

>>15488378
>Just choose to belive in something for which there is no convincing evidence whatsoever, checkmate atheists

>>15492443
Mindless refutation.

>>15493614
Also a soulless refutation.
Ignore the conditions of suffering around you! Love Great Leader more!

>>15492443
>jesus calls mammon/riches a master not because wealth is evil by nature, but because of the control it has over people
LMAO at this attempted revision. Ain't no Jesus except Supply Side Jesus.

>>15493627
>Also a soulless refutation.
Thinks *imaginary aspect* makes him better.
>Ignore the conditions of suffering around you!
>Love Great Leader more!
Every christian ever.
>Judge not less ye be judged.
>No u
Also every christian ever.
Keep refuting commie.

That just opens up a whole can of worms you now have to deal with

Having your creator God treat the morals of your religion as arbitrary is really bad. If he can just change his mind it leads to a pointless hollow system that you cant really build anything from. Probably a harder problem to handle then the original problem of evil you were trying to hand wave.

Im sure it leads to cognitive dissonance in christian and the do as I say not as I do mentality.

Just my 2 cents

>>15493175
Firm belief in something for which there is no proof is the definition of "faith".

>>15495011
If there is evidence of your faith being real it stops being faith and becomes science.
>King me theists

>>15488465
This is too much of an oversimplification. Bible verses aren't complex, but it's like what 1000 pages? You should get an idea for the nuances and use your intellect (and the Holy Spirit) to deduct what is actually the case.

In this case it's not just "lel God created pharaoh so he could do x and y lel" that sounds stupid because it is. Nobody's life is so banal. Obviously God created a person who became Pharaoh. If Pharaoh under no circumstances wanted to obey God's will and wanted to in all cases to be wicked, then it could be said that God respecting his free choice still allowed him to become Pharaoh and through infinite numberless conditional consequences decreed that what happened was an appropriate result that respects everyone's free will and brings about the appropriate consequences while violating no laws or free wills.

>if God real why bad thing happen
Because God is a power outside the petty moralities of man. He is also beyond time because he has no beginning and no end. God is time-loose, he resides, if we want to get scientific, in the subquantal field. Adam and Eve have made the first sin and thus they have invited the very concept of sin into pure existence. When and how they did it is irrelevant. You could very well be Adam or Eve, and because you sinned even once in your life, you introduced this time-free element into reality, and received punishment from God. For some power outside of reality, whatever happens here happens all at once or not at all. So the fact that it happened, means it happened and it's real and punishable.
And what is the punishment for sin? A life on earth that ends in death. Simple as. Earth, life, our whole existence is meant to be a punishment.

So why do bad thing happen? Because of (You)

>>15495026
Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

>>15495061
Why is God bound by all these obscure rules about "free will" and "appropriate consequences" on some occasions. But other times he's a flagrant interventionist with no concern for people's choices? God didn't respect the Jew's choice to abandon him and worship the golden calf. He didn't respect all mankind's choice to build the Tower of Babel. He did not respect the people of Sodom and Gomorrah's choice to be either inhospitable and/or to practice homosexuality, depending on which interpretation you choose.

>>15488843
literally mongoloid, you would know if you actually tried to do any science at all, but since you don't have the dedication to do it it is easier to simply construct a world-view that fits your world.

Science is not a cult that tries to obfuscate what they have done, it's accessible for anyone, more so now than ever before.

>>15495156
>Why is God bound by all these obscure rules about "free will" and "appropriate consequences" on some occasions. But other times he's a flagrant interventionist with no concern for people's choices?

They are not obscure rules but God's rules, obviously impossible to know or to calculate when we lack the comprehensive knowledge he has. There is no contradiction.

>>15495119
>Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.
So you agree.

>>15495273
>obviously impossible to know
>Proceeds to explain how he knows

>>15495273
What do you mean when you say they are "God's rules"? Did he make these rules? Or is he bound by them? He seems quite selective about how and when he applies them, as I said. There exists a contradiction and one does not need infinite knowledge to see it. God frequently avoids easy, bloodless solutions to problems in favour of elaborate ruses which involve violence, people say this is because he does not want to interfere in human matters. On other occasions, he does interfere in human matters, in blunt, crude, obvious ways, his concern for human's free-will seems to wax and wane depending on the needs of the story.

>>15495280
Yes I agree with Hebrews 11:

https://www.bible.com/bible/59/HEB.11.ESV

>Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the people of old received their commendation. By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.

>By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. And through his faith, though he died, he still speaks. By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was commended as having pleased God. And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.

>By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised. Therefore from one man, and him as good as dead, were born descendants as many as the stars of heaven and as many as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore.

>These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city.

>By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, of whom it was said, “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back. By faith Isaac invoked future blessings on Jacob and Esau. By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff. By faith Joseph, at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his bones.

>>15495306
How can you say there are easy solutions aviailable when you have limited information and exist in a moment of time but God has all the information, is not limited by time and sees the future consequences to any actions about to happen and knows how the current conditions came to be from the whole past of existence and all of its variables? Just because something seems nonsensical or contradictory to you in a moment of time with limited information, does not mean it's nonsensical or contradictory to someone operating in eternity with all information.

Damn, the only thing I see is atheists telling their opinion on God's will, but no arguments, no one is smarter than God, no one can fool him or prove him wrong. Yes you guys are right, if God can imagine pain and create it, him knowing everything means he knows how it feels, the worst terrors ever, when he creates humans some human's conciousness experience those kind of experiences, because they exist, wether God wants to or not, what exists exists, end of story. Impossibility also exists, and you're asking God to do the impossible, that's illogical.

>>15495380
>Yes I agree
Good sport.
Science wins again!
We need some tl;dr for the rest of your post though.

>>15495403
I can say that there are easy solutions available because God is supposed to be all-powerful. With the smallest bit of imagination and critical thinking skills he could solve most of the problems that come up in the Bible without unnecessary violence. I do not see how God's plan can possibly be justified with more information. Consider the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, God airstrikes an entire city because it has a large gay community. Even the most ardent homophobe would deem this excessive. Why did they all have to die? The only possible excuse is to say: "God foresaw that they were going to do something bad and killed them before it happened." If this is the case, God should understand that mankind cannot see into the future and so, from our perspective, it looks as if he has just called in an orbital strike because male affection makes him uncomfortable. this looks petty and deranged from our point of view and inspires us to dismiss him.

>>15491857
Nigga the world was not more peaceful before Christianity. We're in the most peaceful period of human history right now and it's not because of the declining religiosity. Modern weaponry and globalised economy has made so that wars are too costly and dangerous to wage.

>>15495486
What do you suppose Christianity did to slow the progress of war?

>>15495496
It did nothing. People are going to fight wars regardless of religion.

>>15495523
I agree.

>>15495478
based

>>15495478
There are no easy solutions to something as complex as the world with millions of free wills operating. Not only that, it is not even necessary that the easy solution should be the right one. From the perspective of eternity and of all the moving parts certain things happen the way they do and only appear deranged from your point of view while from the fuller perspective they are the most obvious, rightful solution. Sodom and Gomorrah were obviously beyond repentance for that to have happened but not only that, we do not know what influence they had and would spread in future or how they impacted all the moving parts that our existence consists of. Of course, God knew all of its past, all of its present and all of its future, all the moving parts involved in all three directions and all the individual wills involved in the process, in the past, now and in the future. If you can do that then sure go ahead and say something is deranged. Also just because you don't think mass homosexuality (as if we know for a fact that that was the ONLY thing they were involved in) deserved this kind of ending, does not mean that it in fact does not deserve it. Your opinion about what inspires someone to dismiss God or not seems trivial...there are very smart people who would dissmis him because of this and there are very smart people who would not. They come to different conclusions usually because one judge everything by their own center of morality and knowledge and the other consider the possibility that they might not know everything or understand everything.

>>15495558
>peace on earth
>kill all homos
>keep molesting kids
>win

>>15495558
What I am saying is that God, despite being an all-knowing being, doesn't even think about how his actions will be perceived by others. If God, absolutely felt that killing the entire gay community was vital part of his master plan, he could have done it artfully. If God poisoned the water supply, his campaign of mass-extermination would have succeeded and nobody could prove that he was responsible. That is unquestionably a better option, because the vast majority of people consider the story of Sodom and Gomorrah to be one of the strongest arguments against Christianity, it is, as they say "bad optics." God's public approval rating has probably plummeted more from that one story then any other God should have known this and seen to it that "the hit" couldn't be traced back to him.

>as if we know for a fact that that was the ONLY thing they were involved in

That remark is purely speculative, I move that it be stricken from the record.

>>15495630
What if he does think how his actions will be perceived by others and is disappointed by your reaction and inability to question things beyond a comical caricature of a human-court (of public opinion no less)? You really think God is going to become some sleazy politician concerned with public optics so that some 21st century liberal sexual deviant will not have his feelings offended because he lives in sin?

Why should God exterminate unrepentant sexual deviants artfully so that nobody knows he did it, when he openly proclaimed that homosexuality is a sin (against God's rules)?

I don't think you are making any sense beyond just looking at this situation with your feelings.

>>15495698
If God did take the perception of modern man into account, why didn't he do things more carefully? As I said, perhaps killing all those people was necessary, but it looks bad from our human point of view and turns us away from the religion. Presumably God wants as many recruits as possible and he (apparently) cares about free will, so I would think that public pinon is very important to him.

>Why should God exterminate unrepentant sexual deviants artfully so that nobody knows he did it, when he openly proclaimed that homosexuality is a sin (against God's rules)

Because it doesn't make him look like a wise, regal Zeus type of god (which is presumably the image God wants to project for himself) it makes him look like some kind of savage tribal god who's incapable of thinking beyond his immediate feelings. Policemen openly proclaim that stealing is wrong, but a Policeman wouldn't beat a thief senseless, in a public environment, whilst screaming like a chimpanzee, because that kind of behaviour makes the person responsible look like an uncivilised savage.

>I don't think you are making any sense beyond just looking at this situation with your feelings.

No, I'm thinking: if I were a God and I were living in the Iron age, and I knew what the future was going to be like; how would I build a religion which would endure?

>>15495762
OK, you're retarded.

>>15495772
And your manners are exactly what I have come to expect from the followers of your so-called "religion of peace".

>>15488378
There is honestly no better system currently than modern day Christianity. Obviously no one thinks it's perfect, but I challenge anyone to come up with something better.
btw you can't just take God out and still have the same system. Taking God out of the system fundamentally changes it into an inferior system which will be eaten by Islam or other systems.

>>15495831
>system

you will burn in hell you intellectual child, means to an end materialists receive not a single iota of grace

>>15495987
What?

>>15495987
based af

>>15495987
Christianity isn't perfect because Christ has not yet come to set up His perfect kingdom.
Again, I challenge anyone to come up with a better system than modern Christianity.

>>15496068