First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  Last
Post Reply Isnt following Abrahamic God kinda like admiring psychopathic brothers or family?
10262 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/19/16

Deyre wrote:

Either way i realise even with the argument for "Fighting against Kingdom of God" God is still the definition of a psychopath. Even if we were to say Jesus or any stuff had a teacher as a founder or any abrahamic faith it still would be wrong and evil. Like you could say that fighting for god's kingdom is better than going your own way and to whatever happens or saying that he has strict rules for that reason, while some are universial and good and some are questionable, the problem with that argument is that you have to lie to yourself by saying god is good, or the fact he doesnt want to understand you but actually wants pure obedience otherwise he sends you to his evil brother to torture you forever. Just like saying an abusive father is good for not punching or hitting you.


Sigh. That's an extremely narrow, out of context view of God's actions. Even when I was an atheist, I understood that the actions of God cannot be defined within the confines of mankind's good and evil. We cannot see the whole picture or the end result. If the final outcome was better than what could have been due to something seemingly horrific, that seemingly horrific act was an act of good.

It isn't about understanding everything, but about understanding that you can't understand everything. Stop pretending you can.
Banned
1524 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Norway
Offline
Posted 10/19/16 , edited 10/19/16

HolyDrumstick wrote:


Deyre wrote:

Either way i realise even with the argument for "Fighting against Kingdom of God" God is still the definition of a psychopath. Even if we were to say Jesus or any stuff had a teacher as a founder or any abrahamic faith it still would be wrong and evil. Like you could say that fighting for god's kingdom is better than going your own way and to whatever happens or saying that he has strict rules for that reason, while some are universial and good and some are questionable, the problem with that argument is that you have to lie to yourself by saying god is good, or the fact he doesnt want to understand you but actually wants pure obedience otherwise he sends you to his evil brother to torture you forever. Just like saying an abusive father is good for not punching or hitting you.


Sigh. That's an extremely narrow, out of context view of God's actions. Even when I was an atheist, I understood that the actions of God cannot be defined within the confines of mankind's good and evil. We cannot see the whole picture or the end result. If the final outcome was better than what could have been due to something seemingly horrific, that seemingly horrific act was an act of good.

It isn't about understanding everything, but about understanding that you can't understand everything. Stop pretending you can.


I can understand abuse. Its clear as day. Adding mysterious to it dont change that fact.

Back then if you fought gods with gods, that kingdom would be the winner and the loser would worship the winners gods, or goddesses. (Dont wanna be sexist : 3). I guess monotheism was an utophian idea of more or less stop that. And now... we dont need it to say the least.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZJ-_OTvsqo
10262 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/19/16

Deyre wrote:

I can understand abuse. Its clear as day. Adding mysterious to it dont change that fact.

Back then if you fought gods with gods, that kingdom would be the winner and the loser would worship the winners gods, or goddesses. (Dont wanna be sexist : 3). I guess monotheism was an utophian idea of more or less stop that. And now... we dont need it to say the least.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZJ-_OTvsqo


Sigh. No, you can't even understand that there are things you can't understand.

I mean, you don't want to believe in God? Cool. Do that.

But, if you think you have a legit argument to prove God is evil, you're wrong. Whether he exists or not, even examining the bible as a work of fiction, one must understand that they cannot understand. You can't.
Banned
1524 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Norway
Offline
Posted 10/19/16

HolyDrumstick wrote:


Deyre wrote:

I can understand abuse. Its clear as day. Adding mysterious to it dont change that fact.

Back then if you fought gods with gods, that kingdom would be the winner and the loser would worship the winners gods, or goddesses. (Dont wanna be sexist : 3). I guess monotheism was an utophian idea of more or less stop that. And now... we dont need it to say the least.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZJ-_OTvsqo


Sigh. No, you can't even understand that there are things you can't understand.

I mean, you don't want to believe in God? Cool. Do that.

But, if you think you have a legit argument to prove God is evil, you're wrong. Whether he exists or not, even examining the bible as a work of fiction, one must understand that they cannot understand. You can't.


I can't understand the mind of a killer, but that doesn't mean he's what you call a person i should praise. Instinct.
10262 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/19/16

Deyre wrote:
I can't understand the mind of a killer, but that doesn't mean he's what you call a person i should praise. Instinct.


Lord God, please give this young man maturity and perspective, in Jesus' name. Amen.
Posted 10/19/16
if you're going to start putting prayers here, I might just start quoting yhvh's enemies
82 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 10/19/16
Just gonna slide on in and give my two cents.

Drumstick, you're a fool.

Deyre, keep up the good work.

Please continue.

*grabs popcorn*
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 10/19/16 , edited 10/19/16

HolyDrumstick
False. I was an atheist from 6 to 27 years of age.
I became Christian only once I had accepted 2 things:

1.) The true nature and teaching of Christ is love. If you think you're a Christian when you hate this type of sinner or that type of sinner, or you're trying to force people to make laws to support that bigotry, you're not following Christ. Christ expressly stated that only God should judge.
Why is that? I mean, if it were as simple as "They broke the rules, they go to hell," why would it matter if we said someone was going to hell or not? Psalms 21:2 "Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD ponders the hearts." That means that on some level God's judgments are based on our intentions and hearts, not some set of rules. It isn't so black and white. And, we as humans cannot judge, because we cannot ponder the heart as God does.

2.) There is no way I can know everything. I mean, even if you supposed the bible was 100% accurate, there's still a whole lot of stuff that remains complete mystery. And the same can be said of science. Therefore, we cannot pretend to know everything. We can only have faith and hope we know enough.


So, for me, it truly isn't Stockholm Syndrome, because I was never held captive. I came to Christ only once I understood His nature for myself. But, I can promise you that only basing your beliefs on others' judgments is unhealthy for the believers and non-believers alike.



1. That totally depends on one's interpratation of the scriptures. Granted, it is the conventional notion that christianity teaches love, but the thing about religion is that even though the believer might think that what they're doing is loving, quite often it will be quite the opposite. Hence for instance cases like this: http://time.com/8750/faith-healing-parents-jailed-after-second-childs-death/
And I can think of both more mundane cases and more extreme cases as well. Both from personal experience as a former believer and from documented cases elsewhere.

And you say that if one hates group X or group Y then that means they're not following Christ, but first of all, that's a No True Scotsman fallacy, and second, that's just your opinion based on your personal interpretation of the scriptures. And here's the thing -- EVERY believer thinks that their personal interpretation is correct and waterproof. You are not unique in that regard.
And third, it makes no difference to the practical implications that religious faith has on the world. Those believers who hate and judge still exist. They still fuck the world up.

As for the concept of hell -- no matter how you slice it -- it is still abusive, malicious, cruel and unjust.

--

2. So you acknowledge that we can't know everything... And this, in addition to the notion that the teaching of Christ is love -- which is ENTIRELY subjective, and by no means an objective verified fact -- was enough for you to say "I believe that this ancient book that tells stories of events that it claims really happened that never actually happened, that tells of concepts of nature that have been completely disproven by science, that tells of how the world was created that is completely wrong, just like all other creation myths that I don't believe in, that is supposed to be divinely inspired by a perfect author yet has still caused more division, conflict, prejudice, suffering and death than any other work of literature in human history and that makes supernatural claims that cannot be substantiated by science and that we have no reason to believe are true -- IS true.

That is what you concluded based on these two things?

--

As for the Stockholm Syndrome aspect of it, well, even if we go by that reasoning, you are still by far the minority as most people who are beleivers were indoctrinated into it from birth.

But even so, assuming that the bible is real, we would all be dependant on god's mercy (or lack thereof) whether we liked it or not. Like children under the rule of their father -- which is also a comparison that religion likes to make. We are his "children" supposedly.
When in reality, the only parent in this household that really ever was there for us was that which birthed us -- mother earth herself, who is severely neglectful and barely ever interacts with us, leaving us to take care of ourselves -- and the father (if there even was one) was always absent. We get letters from someone claiming to be our father, but is it really him or just one of the elder kids playing tricks on us, trying to get us to do their chores for them under the pretense that this "father" will reward us or punish us depending on what we do when he supposedly finally comes home...
10262 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/19/16
Everyone is welcome to believe what they want.

If you think I'm a fool, there is little I can say to change your mind.

I just pray that you're all treated with love and treat you that way if I ever meet any of you.

I didn't decide to become a Christian because it was easy. There's always adversity.
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 10/19/16

HolyDrumstick wrote:

Everyone is welcome to believe what they want.
If you think I'm a fool, there is little I can say to change your mind.
I just pray that you're all treated with love and treat you that way if I ever meet any of you.
I didn't decide to become a Christian because it was easy. There's always adversity.


I'm just questioning the rationale and reasoning behind your conversion. Sorry if it came out dickish.
As for how I treat others, I subscribe to the philosophy of secular humanism. So yes.
82 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 10/19/16

HolyDrumstick wrote:

Everyone is welcome to believe what they want.

If you think I'm a fool, there is little I can say to change your mind.

I just pray that you're all treated with love and treat you that way if I ever meet any of you.

I didn't decide to become a Christian because it was easy. There's always adversity.


Fools aren't persuasive or logical, that's why you can't change any rational person's mind. :/

10262 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/19/16

weeaboo1914 wrote:
Fools aren't persuasive or logical, that's why you can't change any rational person's mind. :/



Sorry you have that opinion.
10262 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/19/16 , edited 10/19/16

Syndicaidramon wrote:


HolyDrumstick
False. I was an atheist from 6 to 27 years of age.
I became Christian only once I had accepted 2 things:

1.) The true nature and teaching of Christ is love. If you think you're a Christian when you hate this type of sinner or that type of sinner, or you're trying to force people to make laws to support that bigotry, you're not following Christ. Christ expressly stated that only God should judge.
Why is that? I mean, if it were as simple as "They broke the rules, they go to hell," why would it matter if we said someone was going to hell or not? Psalms 21:2 "Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD ponders the hearts." That means that on some level God's judgments are based on our intentions and hearts, not some set of rules. It isn't so black and white. And, we as humans cannot judge, because we cannot ponder the heart as God does.

2.) There is no way I can know everything. I mean, even if you supposed the bible was 100% accurate, there's still a whole lot of stuff that remains complete mystery. And the same can be said of science. Therefore, we cannot pretend to know everything. We can only have faith and hope we know enough.


So, for me, it truly isn't Stockholm Syndrome, because I was never held captive. I came to Christ only once I understood His nature for myself. But, I can promise you that only basing your beliefs on others' judgments is unhealthy for the believers and non-believers alike.



1. That totally depends on one's interpratation of the scriptures. Granted, it is the conventional notion that christianity teaches love, but the thing about religion is that even though the believer might think that what they're doing is loving, quite often it will be quite the opposite. Hence for instance cases like this: http://time.com/8750/faith-healing-parents-jailed-after-second-childs-death/
And I can think of both more mundane cases and more extreme cases as well. Both from personal experience as a former believer and from documented cases elsewhere.

And you say that if one hates group X or group Y then that means they're not following Christ, but first of all, that's a No True Scotsman fallacy, and second, that's just your opinion based on your personal interpretation of the scriptures. And here's the thing -- EVERY believer thinks that their personal interpretation is correct and waterproof. You are not unique in that regard.
And third, it makes no difference to the practical implications that religious faith has on the world. Those believers who hate and judge still exist. They still fuck the world up.

As for the concept of hell -- no matter how you slice it -- it is still abusive, malicious, cruel and unjust.

--

2. So you acknowledge that we can't know everything... And this, in addition to the notion that the teaching of Christ is love -- which is ENTIRELY subjective, and by no means an objective verified fact -- was enough for you to say "I believe that this ancient book that tells stories of events that it claims really happened that never actually happened, that tells of concepts of nature that have been completely disproven by science, that tells of how the world was created that is completely wrong, just like all other creation myths that I don't believe in, that is supposed to be divinely inspired by a perfect author yet has still caused more division, conflict, prejudice, suffering and death than any other work of literature in human history and that makes supernatural claims that cannot be substantiated by science and that we have no reason to believe are true -- IS true.

That is what you concluded based on these two things?

--

As for the Stockholm Syndrome aspect of it, well, even if we go by that reasoning, you are still by far the minority as most people who are beleivers were indoctrinated into it from birth.

But even so, assuming that the bible is real, we would all be dependant on god's mercy (or lack thereof) whether we liked it or not. Like children under the rule of their father -- which is also a comparison that religion likes to make. We are his "children" supposedly.
When in reality, the only parent in this household that really ever was there for us was that which birthed us -- mother earth herself, who is severely neglectful and barely ever interacts with us, leaving us to take care of ourselves -- and the father (if there even was one) was always absent. We get letters from someone claiming to be our father, but is it really him or just one of the elder kids playing tricks on us, trying to get us to do their chores for them under the pretense that this "father" will reward us or punish us depending on what we do when he supposedly finally comes home...


1.) That hell is cruel is equally subjective and based on interpretation. So, yes this is my interpretation. Or whatever. Okay.

2.) Nope. I don't believe I ever said that I believed everything in the bible is an undeniable truth. I said "supposing" which in and of itself suggests that 100% accuracy is not what I believe.

No, I simply acknowledge that I cannot know. Therefore anything I believe will be based on faith.

The Jesus Christ I believe in is worth that faith, in my opinion.
13577 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / Australia
Offline
Posted 10/19/16 , edited 10/19/16
Uh ummmm, what? Does the brother have to be psychopathic? Can't understand you OP.


Syndicaidramon wrote:

As for the concept of hell -- no matter how you slice it -- it is still abusive, malicious, cruel and unjust.


I'd hate to play devils advocate but I'm going to. Why is hell "unjust"? Assuming there is a hell of course and please don't come out with that "FINITE CRIME FOR ETERNAL PUNISHMENT WOW UNFAIR" bullshit. Even in our own HUMAN legal system the duration taken committing a murder would have no effect on the sentence, since I imagine god wouldn't take kindly to rejecting his only begotten son of course the sentence is going to be costly for yourself . You could also go the route of arguing that hell isn't a place of punishment but rather a place of separation of god.


Syndicaidramon wrote:

by a perfect author yet has still caused more division, conflict, prejudice, suffering and death than any other work of literature in human history and that makes supernatural claims that cannot be substantiated by science and that we have no reason to believe are true -- IS true.


The bible isn't a single book written by a single "Perfect author". It's a collection of books written by multiple people. Also Supernatural claims by definition cannot be substantiated by science since --> "supernatural
ˌsuːpəˈnatʃ(ə)r(ə)l,ˌsjuː-/Submit
adjective
1.
(of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature."
Posted 10/19/16
It's a nonsensical book that provides no insights into anything special or extraordinary. It can't even tell us how the universe came about or that there exists micro-organisms that those uneducated people cannot see at the time, that's why they only say "plants, animals and humans" but never bacteria or archea.
It isn't a science book, but why mention plants, animals and humans, yet leave out microorganisms? Is it because they're not as significant? Or is it because those people were simply stupid and could only write their BS based on what they could see rather than what they can't. It's pretty laughable that in the 21st century, some people cannot deduce that those men were obviously lying and had no knowledge of anything other than shit from their asses.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.