/lit/ - Literature

I don't know. Islam seems to allow for almost anything in one way or another except for eating pork.

Why so many Zizek posts lately? Did something happen?

>>20069175
Yes and no, because of Hell.

>>20069175
Possible, yes. Permitted, no.

>>20069175
Stop trying to be clever with inverted witticisms that don't make ANY sense. If god exists that means there is inescapable and infallible judgement, a distinct lack of permissiveness.

>>20069183
Zizek posting is cyclical and thus will never end, much like the argument on what is and isn't permitted by God

>>20069218
Hell is just a place for edgier people who aren't into the culture of heaven, it's not a punishment. Read Swedenborg.

>>20069240
depends on the god

>>20069240
It does make sense though. God is by necessity supraethical and therefore able to suspend them and justify any action.

>>20069233
permitted, yes...
>>20069240
God has evidently permitted sin to occur.

>>20069240
>stop disagreeing with my childish judgements about the world. Only I get to say how things work!

>>20069270
>depends on the god
Yeah because when people debate god they're obviously talking about Zeus, right?

>>20069240
>Stop trying to be clever with inverted witticisms that don't make ANY sense
Zizekcucks would literally fade out of existence if they did this, they have zero originality and zero intelligence. One or the other might be forgivable, but both? Subhuman to a fault.

>>20069303
no you fucking retard. the christian conception of god is not at all the same as the islamic or the hindu or even a deist view on god

>>20069240
>If god exists that means there is inescapable and infallible judgement

If God exists then what is moral is simply what he orders is moral, which means that if he orders you to genocide the Amalekites, this behavior becomes intrinsically good behavior.

QED, if God exists, anything is permitted, as long as God orders it.

>>20069240
Fedora tippers (especially the Marxist type) cannot into logic (and this thread is proof), don't even bother anon.

>>20069324
How do you know I was referring to the Christian god? HMMM, could it be clearly implicit just like your intellectual dishonesty? HMM...

>it's definitely Jesus
proof?

>>20069175
>a penny saved.....is a penny spent!

>>20069331
you clearly strongly implied either the christian or the islamic god lol. what is intellectually dishonest about recognizing that different religions (and even sects within religious currents) have completely different views on god? are you a catholic?

>>20069331
>>20069312
>>20069240
based
so funny to see the commiecucks with their 'WELL ACTUALLY MAYBE GOD IS A HINDU WOMAN' or whatever other tripe as their only argument when Zizek is LITERALLY quoting Dostoyevsky and talking about the Christian god in a way that is undeniable. It goes to show not only are they too stupid to actually know what they are talking about, they are so stupid they talk in spite of it, illiterate and without reason, they are simply parrots with worse morals.

>the last savior of the fedora lords forgot pascals wager
typical, if there is a god we follow his rules

>>20069264
If hell is worse than this world, then how is it not a punishment?

>>20069345
oh, and there is and we do, self-evidently

why are there so many christ larpers on this board
it's really off putting desu

>>20069355
Because after the 2000s atheist reddit contrarian phase became cringe, all those people became religious for contrarian reasons instead.

>>20069355
Go back.

>>20069349
It's literally just 'different strokes for different folks', people in hell are allowed in heaven but choose not to stay. They like hell more because they're into the naughty sort of activities they get to engage in there. It's all in the book Heaven and Hell.

>>20069371
>begone heathen, 4chan is a Christian website! Deus vult!

>>20069183
pure ideology desu

>>20069326
>as long as God orders it.
Then anything is not permitted.

>>20069396
Anything within the realm of human possibility was ordered by God and is thus permitted. This is not that hard to understand.

>>20069240
>if anything I imagine can be reified into an absolute authority which sanctions my actions then any such actions are permitted
That's what it means; doesn't make sense to you because of your slave morality

>But you shee *shniff*, the question which poses itself *tugs shirt* in the context of *rubs nose* morality is not merely one of *shniff* right and wrong, but under what circumstance *shniffs and tugs shirt* is it wrong to do the right thing and vice versa *shniff*. the bible, to give you a hegelian *rubs nose* counterpoint to the postmodern subjective idea of morality, clearly outlines *shniff* multiple instances where the eternal, infallible, imperative and so on uh *shniff* laws of god can be circumvented if the situation demands it. *shniff*. to give you a specific example, take the destruction of Babylon *shniffs and tugs shirt* God has forbidden it to murder people, and yet *shniff* the annihilation of the people of Babylon is perfectly acceptable because their death, including *shniff* their women and *rubs nose* children is, simply put, not murder for murder only applies to humans. they are not humans, they are not people, they are Babylonians, and as such *shniff* they are of the serpent seed which *rubs nose and tugs shirt* must be destroyed at all cost. in another sense, they are simply evil, *shniff* and so to kill their children, even in the most brutal *shniff* of ways, you know dashing their heads against the rocks and so on, *tugs shirt* does not constitute murder because god has ordained it so.

>>20069415
Really immersive, makes me feel like I'm at an early synod. If you don't think this is exactly what the kind of pilpul behind the church sounds like then you're delusional

>>20069175
Okay Judge Holden

>>20069415
>>But you shee *shniff*, the question which poses itself *tugs shirt*
ten words into a wall of text but my sides are in orbit

>>20069240
This is like the singular most basic possible interpretation.

>>20069175
>If there is a God, then anything is permitted
I mean you could just be a deist, albeit a very evil one.

>>20069405
>Anything within the realm of human possibility was ordered by God
Wrong

>>20069411
>god exists
>I made him up btw for my convenience
I'd tell you how stupid you are, but you're too stupid to understand.

>>20069458
If i have to accept your definition of god on faith then there's no reason you can't accept mine on the same basis. I get that atheism is lame now because you associate video games where you get to be a knight with counterculture, but that doesn't make god any more easily defensible

I think, Inever understood the dosto version and I'm not sure if I understand this one.
So, is everything permitted then, because it needs a god to do the permitting?

>>20069504
>I think, Inever understood the dosto version
It's not hard to understand. If there is no god then ultimately there is no ultimate accountability for anything you do. If you commit murder and get away with it then that's the end of it. Whether what you did was "wrong" or not is irrelevant.

>>20069453
God created the world knowing exactly what would happen and having the opportunity to make literally anything else happen instead, yes he ordered it.

>>20069509
This doesn't work even in a deterministic system. There is difference between God's decree of creation and his prescriptive will, the latter being the things that he commands of humans.

>>20069519
Cute wordsalad there. God knows all and has the power over all, thus anything that happens is because he allowed it to.

>>20069525
>god is anti-reality and necessitates the denial of nature
capeshit tier theology

>>20069525
That's not the same as ordering something. What God permits to occur is not the same as what he commands you to do.

>>20069531
Saying random words isn't going to convince anybody

>>20069508
Ok thanks. Then I just thought everything is permitted anyway, I guess.

>>20069534
A distinction without a difference.

>>20069541
Wrong. If you God commands you to do X and you do not do X then you will be judged for it. Whether he allowed you to do otherwise is irrelevant.

>>20069545
God hasn't commanded anything and free will is a gay meme.

>>20069553
free will is pretty fun actually. don't knock it before you try it

>>20069558
Pathetic attempt at an NPC joke, only NPCs believe in free will. It's a ridiculous concept. No matter how complex the ideas spinning around inside of your head are, they were all set into motion by external forces.

>>20069560
suit yourself anon

>>20069553
Free will has nothing to do with it. If you're just going to cop out and say God didn't do anything to begin with when you can't argue any more then there's no point talking to you.

>>20069563
There was never any point, apparently. Your reading comprehension is at way too low of a level for this to work.

>>20069560
Calvinist

>>20069562
We've both already been suited.

>>20069569
Try reading a theology text, you retard.
>inb4 theology doesn't matter because blah blah
Then stop talking about.

>>20069572
Calvin was so close yet so far. God is responsible for all, but he is good.

>>20069573
I choose to disagree

>>20069175
I don't need permission to do as I will.

>>20069579
You only say this because you've never read one. I have, they do not agree with you. What you're expressing is only present in children's sunday school books.

>>20069537
>god can super duper do everything because its his power
>stop saying random words
The Romans thought christers were atheists, so its no wonder your incredulous slavish view of God has led to his death

>>20069585
It's so cute that you think that

>>20069560
The internal complexity of the decision mechanisms of the brain mitigate external causality. There is no such thing as "external", your false dualistic partitioning of the causal nexus is a contrivance. There is only one continuous flow of energy fields

>>20069595
like I said, give it a try. it makes life more exciting

>>20069590
Which theology text are you referring to when you are telling me that's God's creation is equivalent to God *commanding* all possible human actions that will ever occur.

>>20069545
>If you God commands you to do X and you do not do X then you will be judged for it.

Yes, which means if he commands you to murder people, murdering people becomes good behavior.

>your false dualistic partitioning of the causal nexus is a contrivance

>>20069606
If God commanded it then it is not murder since murder is illicit killing.

>>20069602
You might as well ask me to sight a text telling you that the sky is blue. It's so obvious that you'll almost never hear it stated like that, you'll only hear it as part of more complex statements that apparently went way over your head. There are a wealth of determinist theologians and they all sound way more intelligent than the free will-believing moralfag copers.

>>20069415
>"Hello, and so on"
>crowd starts thunderous applause

>>20069615
*cite

lol

>>20069182
Read more nigger.

>>20069613
Then there is no such thing as murder.

>>20069419
I'm considering becoming a cult leader so this means a lot to me

>>20069613
Which is a very convenient way for you to avoid coping with Divine Command Theory.

>>20069615
In other words you can't cite anything.

>>20069634
Says the guy who just said "read a book!!!!" Pick any Calvinist work, for starters.

>>20069627
You might as well say "I'm considering becoming a baseball hall of famer". It's not about the wanting, it's about the work. Get off your lazy ass and do it!

>>20069637
The distinction I made earlier about God's decretive will and prescriptive will is fundamental to Calvinism, retard.

>>20069650
I'm working on it man. reading the books, outlining a system of correct beliefs, upping my charisma. I'm on it

>>20069653
A distinction without a difference. Calvin was very clear that the end result is all the same, you're destined for either heaven or hell and nothing will change it.

>>20069175
If everything is permitted then why will you never be a woman?

>>20069667
Because I hate women

>>20069660
>Uh you're wrong read a book about Calvinism
>What I just said is explicitly part of Calvinism
>Uh it doesn't matter anyway hurr
Fuck off idiot

>>20069175
Based

>>20069675
You sound like such a child. You're quoting some useless sophistry you heard in a youtube video and throwing a shitfit when I clearly lay out that it is useless.

>>20069415
>It's not that simple! It's not! People always think "oh it's easy, just do good things" but it's not that easy! You have to WANT to do good things, but not because it feels good to do good, but because it's right! and that's hard, that's a hard thing to do, because people think "well, what's the point of doing good if it's not good for me?" and that's what the story of Job teaches us. The dragon of chaos comes into Job's life and wreaks havoc. I mean it's just terrible, you know, his crops fail and he loses all of his money and then his wife and children die from disease and he is left destitute. But Job doesn't give up on his faith in god despite all of life and society telling him he's wrong! And that's what makes Job a good man, despite all his misfortunes he just doesn't give up because... because it's the right thing to do!

>>20069699
Even without the snot onomatopoeia, this is still clearly the more retarded statement.

>>20069698
You're the one who appealed to Calvinism to refute an idea that is part of Calvinism. I used to be a Calvinist and that's what I've been referring to the entire time.

>>20069709
I'm just practicing anon

>>20069525
yes the students in the back whispering are doing so because the teacher ordered them to

>>20069607
Grow up

>>20069728
>a human is the same being as god
huh

>>20069735
God is just humans projecting their own power onto the universe, humanity was God all along but humans up to now have refused to recognize themselves as such

>>20069713
I'm not even entertaining the "God knowingly letting something happen an eternity in advance is totally different from God directly making something happen!" meme, it's just an irrelevant cope from some nerd who is scared to call a spade a spade and I have no desire to 'le refoot' it. The common point that any even slightly thoughtful theologian understands that if God is all powerful and all knowing, everything that happens is due to him wanting it to and could otherwise be stopped at any time and replaced with anything else. The retardation comes in when you try to figure out how this reflects on moral dilemmas, which John Calvin was unable to handle.

>>20069728

>>20069175
I disagree, and would be more inclined to say that if there were no God, then everything is not permitted.

>>20069759
If there is no God then you are accountable to yourself

>>20069264
>>20069378
Swedenborg and others say: The fire, but not the punishment of the damned is everlasting. Such the language of the incredulous, but it is folly. For what other purpose would God make this fire eternal, than to chastise the reprobate, who are immortal? But, to take away every shadow of doubt, the Scriptures, in many other places, say, that not only the fire, but the punishment, of the damned is eternal. ”And these, ”says Jesus Christ, “shall go into ever lasting punishment.” (Matthew. xxv. 46.) Again we read in St. Mark, ”Where the worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished.” (ix. 43.) St. John says: ”And the smoke of their torments shall ascend up for ever and ever.” (Apoc. xvi. 11.) “Who,” says St. Paul, ”shall suffer eternal punishment in destruction.” (2 Thess. i. 9.)

Another infidel will ask: How can God justly punish with eternal torments a sin that lasts but a moment? I answer, that the grievousness of a crime is measured not by its duration, but by the enormity of its malice. The malice of mortal sin is, as St. Thomas says, infinite. (1, 2, q. 87, art. 4.) Hence, the damned deserve infinite punishment; and, because a creature is not capable of suffering pains infinite in point of intensity, God, as the holy doctor says, renders the punishment of the damned infinite in extension by making it eternal. Moreover, it is just, that as long as the sinner remains in his sin, the punishment which he deserves should continue. And, therefore, as the virtue of the saints is rewarded in Heaven, because it lasts for ever, so also the guilt of the damned in Hell, because it is everlasting, shall be chastised with everlasting torments. ”Quia non recipit causæ remedium,” says Eusebius Emissenus, “carebit fine supplicium.” The cause of their perverse will continues: therefore, their chastisement will never have an end. The damned are so obstinate in their sins, that even if God offered pardon, their hatred for him would make them refuse it. Hence, the punishment of the reprobate is called a sword, a vengeance which is irrevocable. ”I, the Lord, have drawn my sword out of its sheath, not to be turned back.” (Ezech. xxi. 5.)

Death, which is so terrible in this life, is desired in hell by the damned; but they never shall find it. ”And in these days men shall seek death, and shall not find it: and they shall desire to die, and death shall fly from them.” (Apoc. xi. 6.) They would wish, as a remedy for their eternal ruin, to be exterminated and destroyed. But”there is no poison of destruction in them.” (Wis. i. 14.)

>He needs to ask permission
what are you ten?

>>20069175
Yes, see 1 Cor 10:23
>All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.

>>20069764
It's really amazing the kind of mental gymnastics people will go through to defend a ridiculous concept they were raised with instead of just accepting that it's horseshit and moving on.

>>20069764
Note that the only relevant bible verse in that whole copypasta specifically says "destruction", they will be destroyed forever and not brought back, that's it.

>>20069762
No. It would be hard at this moment instead to say whom or what someone were accountable to, but I would claim that it weren't that they were accountable to the individual.

>>20069764
>The malice of mortal sin is, as St. Thomas says, infinite. (1, 2, q. 87, art. 4.) Hence, the damned deserve infinite punishment
Reminder that the Catholic Church considers masturbation to be a mortal sin and even Catholics are held accountable for mortal sins if they don't truly repent. You've masturbated before and if you have ever apologized, you almost certainly did so without truly accepting it as an act of murder and you expected to do it again. I'm going to bully you in hell.

>>20069805
Obviously the OP quote is hot air but the point he is trying to make is that in an orderly universe, everything is part of a plan and thus 'permitted'. In a chaotic universe, it's much more open to discussion.

>>20069807
Yes, and rightfully so. You chose to abandon, God, reason, heaven, eternity all for a miserable, momentary, transitory pleasure. Have you never remarked what the ivy does to the oak? It first creeps over the outside of the bark, and as it gets stronger, it grows into the oak and forms but one tree with it. Try now to separate them from each other, and you will find that you cannot tear down the ivy without bringing away the bark of the oak, and so killing it. So it is with carnal pleasures. The desires of them increase with continued indulgence, until they become a second nature, so that it is easier to separate the soul from the body, than to take them out of the heart. Hell is merited. If pardoned, they would choose to never relinquish their foolish earthly felicities.

>>20069849
Cope, you're a sinner and are going to hell.

>>20069175
You can tell Zizek has never actually read anything he references to sound smart.

>>20069867
>You can tell Zizek has never actually read anything he references to sound smart.
*blocks you're path*

>>20069857
By default, yes. One must repent and sin no more if they want everlasting beatitude.

>>20069867
sad cope

>>20069885
There's no way you can repent thoroughly enough for all the seed you have spilled. God sees all, he sees your heart, he sees your browsing history.

>>20069888
I don't think Zizek is coping, he's just a conman who knows he can get away with it because his audience will pay up either way.

>>20069810
Yeah I guess if it was meant to be a polemic it did its job. I still think he's wrong though. Not that I would exactly agree with Dosto either. The Devil, if you'll allow, humanity's baser drives, wherever God is rejected, the behavior of whomever did the rejecting would seem to asymptotically tend towards the same line, which seem to go directly against the notion that everything were permitted.

>>20069905
The implication that this isn't the case with Jordan Peterson is plain silly

>>20069908
If God was real, it would be impossible to reject him.

>>20069910
Who even mentioned Peterson other than you? Very weird deflection. But they are birds of a feather in truth, absolute colleagues despite the polarity of their purported 'beliefs'.

>>20069917
>>20069908
Read Aquinas on free will and then kill yourself you philosophical toddler, lmao.

>>20069921
I guess I was pretty lazy in assuming your post stemmed from this >>20069699 and their usual rivalry. We had a pretty heavy discussion of them both last night

>>20069240
BASED

>>20069929
I know this bait, but I commend it anyway. You guys have done such a good job of turning Thomas Aquinas into a meme through stealth parody. No respectable poster here will ever unironically read him now.

>>20069929
No. If you've got something to say then say it, dumbass.

>>20069933
like I said man, I was just practicing

>>20069950
You have a long way to go but keep it up

>>20069957
yeah the Zizek style is a lot easier

>>20069959
JP posts work better when you use an image that really captures his sad and chaotic mental state

>>20069929
>Read Aquinas on free will and then kill yourself you philosophical toddler, lmao.
But now if I go and do that, it will undeniably be because you told me to, disproving free will.

>>20069967
that's a good tip

>>20069175
>If there is a God, then anything is permitted AGAINST EVIL

>>20069175
Of course. It wouldn't happen unless it was permitted.

>>20069893
Repentance is a supernatural grace, one does not do it on their own merits.

>>20070016
you need to go back

>>20070059
That is actual horseshit. The forgiveness is divine, the repentance is on you.

>>20069240
God can permit, in fact orders, the most heinous crime: the sacrifice of a son. Everything I do, if it's based on god's command is permissible.
Thi btw isn't even an original zizekian point

>>20070105
If you feel no remorse for your sins, you cannot repent. Remorse for sin's is a gift from God.

>>20070103

I will return the creator when I am CALLED, and not a second sooner, heathen.

>>20069175
Yes, but Selah after the 1st part.

>>20069910
>the implication
rent free, my dude

>>20070119
oh then it's foregone conclusion, I'll just wait around for god to give me remorse or not