ITT: We go full Ivan Karamazov

File: 2.99 MB, 1920x1080, 1613872202975.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

ITT: We go full Ivan Karamazov Anonymous Sat Jul 24 05:13:05 2021 No.18710886 [Reply] [Original]

In 'The Brothers Karamazov', Ivan powerfully lays out his argument against God: The world is so full of pointless suffering, he argues, that any morally sane person cannot consent to endorse God's plan (at least not from the pitifully limited perspective of the human mind).

To substantiate this argument, Ivan references a number of news stories drawn from the real headlines of Dostoevsky's day.

Without posting gore or other sick shit, please give me your modern version of the Problem of Evil Argument. I'm not asking you to solve or refute it, I'm asking you to POSE the argument in the most precise, substantial and persuasive way that you are able, with reference to real world facts, figures and events.

Why would you say the world is too evil for a sane man to countenance. Why should we return Him our ticket?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 05:19:11 2021 No.18710898 >>18710886 I prefer Camus' "The Plague". Any moral person cannot stand in a ward of dying children and proclaim everything is going according to a loving God's plan. The thought of doing so should be abhorrent and obscene even to contemplate doing so.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 05:21:14 2021 No.18710905

I'll start:

>A large proportion of all the people who ever lived have lived ignorant lives full of suffering and deprivation and the animal kingdom from which we emerged is equally full of starvation and pointless pain. The prey suffers more from being eaten that the pleasure felt by the predator in consuming it.

>Freedom is an incredibly scary prospect because the universe is so much larger than the individual.

>We are fairly powerless in the face of the forces arrayed against us and we are not even internally consistent or committed to our own good or anyone elses. Pathology is the norm.

This why I'm bad at this. I believe everything I've typed but it is not as visceral and dire as what Ivan was able to say. In any case I feel like the Problem of Evil really out to be phrased (and re-phrased in each era) in the most powerful and persuasive way possible in order that we can grapple with its full depth.

Hopefully this thread amounts to more than a bunch of /lit/ christians telling me to read the Bible.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 05:22:29 2021 No.18710906 >>18710898 nah the entire point is to show how strong a man's faith in God has to be. If a man can't believe God is leading the world on the right path with so much suffering, he doesn't believe at all.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 05:22:31 2021 No.18710907

>>18710886
To quote Australia’s leading children’s author:
“Why would I shoot a man (bang) and then take him to hospital? It defeats the purpose of shooting him in the first place.”
Mark Brandon “Chopper” Reed. Famous for shooting a man (bang) and then taking him to hospital. Truly God if he exists is a shitcunt.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 05:22:43 2021 No.18710909 >>18710898 That is certainly punchy. Have any Christians responded to Camus' challenge directly?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 05:25:54 2021 No.18710916 >>18710907 "Why would I condemn my creation to a life of suffering and then redeem them into everlasting life? It defeats the purpose of torturing them in the first place."

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:39:00 2021 No.18711093

>>18710906
You respond to a specific situation with some vapid, vague sentiment. These children are born into doomed lives of pain, misery and death. Now, you propose there is a loving being who not only has the power to change this fate, but is in fact THE ORIGINATOR or this state of affairs. Are these children pawns in some sick game to test your faith? At this point, even if you believe, you should condemn such a being for playing these extremely demented and psychopathic games.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:41:30 2021 No.18711102 >>18710907 Since when did Chopper have a childrens book?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:43:28 2021 No.18711111 >>18710886 >Why would you say the world is too evil for a sane man to countenance there is no good or evil,there is only existence and survival.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:45:55 2021 No.18711117 >>18711093 nah you have no faith in God

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:48:18 2021 No.18711126 >>18710906 >>18711117 Demiurgecucks are more interested in measuring cocks than preserving God's goodness. Never change.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:49:44 2021 No.18711130 >>18710916 >omnipotent being >solves a problem he created, by definition Gee thanks, God. >>18711111 that's WHY the world is evil, you fucking brainlet. did you really need me to make this connection for you? fucking americans.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:52:27 2021 No.18711138 Its almost as if we brought it upon ourselves lol

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:52:54 2021 No.18711141 >>18711117 Why would you have faith given what we know?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:53:22 2021 No.18711142

>>18710886
>Without posting gore or other sick shit, please give me your modern version of the Problem of Evil Argument. I'm not asking you to solve or refute it, I'm asking you to POSE the argument in the most precise, substantial and persuasive way that you are able, with reference to real world facts, figures and events.
look at incels .should short and ugly people get treated like shit be it by women(who btw are the gatekeepers of genetic survival and whose choice can literally ensure ur genetic death),the coworkers or employers(good looking people literally can bullshit their way out and win life),etc.y does god wish to orchestrate such a perverse game of life where one form of life liteally has to leech off of another living or non living thing.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:53:55 2021 No.18711144 >>18711138 >we Punishing children for the wrongs of their parents is immoral, anon.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:54:23 2021 No.18711146 >>18711130 >that's WHY the world is evil, you fucking brainlet. did you really need me to make this connection for you? fucking americans. ok what is evil?absence of good?then what is good?absence of evil?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:54:33 2021 No.18711147 >>18711141 what we know doesn't matter when it comes to faith

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:55:01 2021 No.18711151

>>18711093
Nobody is asking your opinion on good and evil. I've lived through some shit and it's nowhere as bad as it sounds like. Dying is ok. You just judge things to be bad/good from your pathetic human perspective. Which is limited. Appreciate that there is someone larger and smarter than you, who tells you to love and help others, but not judge. Otherwise you haven't learned anything. Not even gonna get into the fact that all of this is due to humans using their free will.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:55:20 2021 No.18711152 >>18711147 No, I mean, why do you have faith in the first place? What caused you to chose the specific thing you put your faith into?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:57:35 2021 No.18711163 >>18711144 no. we are in a continual state of punishment because of the actions of the parents. there is zero chance to have been free of sin after they had already committed the original sin.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:57:47 2021 No.18711165 >>18711130 good and evil are defined for ur convenience buddy.if something increases ur chance of genetic survival in the short and the long term u call it good(even at the expense of others) and if something doesn't fit that u call it evil.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:57:56 2021 No.18711166 >>18711152 God called me to believe in Him

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:58:36 2021 No.18711168 >>18711163 >there is zero chance to have been born free of sin fixed. god doesnt punish a crack head by making crack babies. the crack heads do that themselves.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 06:59:31 2021 No.18711171

>>18711151
>it's nowhere as bad as it sounds like
Go ahead and tell children dying of bone cancer that. I doubt you'd have the nerve. What's worse is if you could do it, that would show the lengths belief in God can cause you to sink to. Also "humans used free will so children suffering is justified". You demonstrate the cognitive debauchery of God apologetics.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:00:31 2021 No.18711173 >>18711166 In what way?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:01:02 2021 No.18711174 >>18711173 In a way I can't ignore

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:02:40 2021 No.18711180 >>18711174 How did you distinguish that from mental illness?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:05:29 2021 No.18711188 >>18711180 I'm not mentally ill because I believe in God

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:08:19 2021 No.18711203

Christianity is meant to appeal to the solipsist.
>I remember suffering at this one point in my life, but then everything turned out ok
There is no ability to zoom out and look at the context or at the axioms of the religion. You have to remember that it was meant for the average Yuro scum of the 3rd century, who probably had nigger-tier IQ. At least in Buddhism you have reincarnation to explain bad things happening to good people.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:08:24 2021 No.18711204 >>18711171 Its hard, and even more painful to understand but nothing happens to man that he is not formed by nature to endure. The children who suffer will be rewarded the most.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:11:36 2021 No.18711213

>>18711203
Yeah bro Christianity was deffo made with the intention of fooling random dummy irish people like 2400 years after the time of Abraham lmao
Its not like it was adopted by all t he greatest philosophical minds in egypt, north africa and greece/italy and then spread through europe.
>pick up a fucking history book

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:12:29 2021 No.18711218 >>18711188 An immaterial being called you in a way you can't ignore. This sounds like schizophrenia. I'm asking how you distinguished it from that condition.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:13:17 2021 No.18711223

>>18711213
Ok, name one who made the argument against the dilemma of evil. Even if you read theologians (le greatest minds) you see how much they rely on faith whenever they can't answer a question. What's more, if you read between the lines, you see that all their arguments are appeals to civilization and ultimately humanism.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:13:54 2021 No.18711226

>>18710886
i love how any of yall faggots always forget the counterpart to god and the real one responsible for the pain and suffering thats going on and how yall always put all the blame on god. the fucking devil.

what the fuck is wrognwith you midwits fucking edgy dumb cunts. think for a fucking second and get rid of the anger against god and start with your own pathetic selves.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:16:23 2021 No.18711232 >>18711226 the devil is powerless, just a fallen angel seething in hell. thanks for playing tho

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:17:26 2021 No.18711238 >>18711232 the funny thing is he really is powerless tho. its like.. a chihuahua does no harm to you unless you let it. same with satan.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:18:46 2021 No.18711242

>>18711218
Because I don't hallucinate, ie I don't hear things that aren't there, see things that aren't there, etc. When I say God called me to believe, I mean in a spiritual way. I did not hear the voice of God literally, I felt it. It was a change in my spirit.
I am also not schizophrenic because I am not delusional.
>inb4 God delusion
Delusions are things that can be proven to be untrue, like the government implanting a chip in my head, using surveillance equipment to monitor me, etc.
I also know I'm not schizophrenic because I don't experience confused thinking. I can understand what people say to me and respond in a way they understand.
These are the symptoms of Schizophrenia described here: https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/schizophrenia

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:22:50 2021 No.18711255

>>18711204
>nothing happens to man that he is not formed by nature to endure.
I don't even know what you mean by this. Man goes through things which kill him, so by definition he does not endure them. Also, "The children who suffer will be rewarded the most.", so if children suffering get extra rewards, you must view the suffering of children as a net positive, since they are just racking up reward points in the afterlife. This is moral corruption of the highest order.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:25:06 2021 No.18711262

>>18711165
How can you not see the massive assumption you are making about human psychology? Just because it evolved under conditions of natural selection does not mean that it operates on an internally articulated principle for gene propagation. In fact modern humans continually ignore low cost reproductive opportunities like sperm banks and third world brides. Your genes and your brain are capable of wanting different things.

As for how to define evil and whether that definition is circular, this too has nothing to do with Darwin. Seeking your own good (ie pleasure, safety etc) is a default mode. Seeking the good of others is altruism. Seeking the good of all is Goodness.
Seeking harm to yourself is masochism. Seeking harm to others is Sadism. Seeking harm to all is Evil. Same goes with seeking for death.

You are trying to make things simple for yourself with Darwin but you are actually throwing out your true natural vocabulary of norms, which seek human goals like Goodness or Evil, rather than the cosmically indifferent mechanistic goals of gene propagation. It is a qualitative distinction, but a necessary one.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:26:45 2021 No.18711270

>>18711242
Faith can be proven to be an unreliable path to the truth. All major religions claim faith as the mechanism for belief, but since they all contradict each other, then it is plain that faith does not lead you to the truth. Therefore, if you labor under the belief that your "spiritual" call from God is a reliable path to the truth, you are delusional.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:27:20 2021 No.18711272

>>18711255
>This is moral corruption of the highest order
Wow, such uber intellectual pwnage.
The suffering of children is still one of the most painful things in this world and their reward in heaven doesnt make their suffering on earth well deserved.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:28:40 2021 No.18711280 >>18711270 No, faith cannot be proven to be an unreliable path to the truth.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:30:12 2021 No.18711285

>>18711171
I was in that situation. Slightly different/easier. Forced treatment with harsh antibiotics at 19. I knew I wasn't sick. Govt thought otherwise, they thought I had drug resistant tb. I'm a third worlder. I couldn't refuse treatment because then I'd "infect others"; I'd be arrested and forced-treated. I ended up with toxic hepatitis and destroyed tendons + cns side effects from cycloserine. I was big into sports. I loved my body. I saw myself wasting away, my hair was falling out, it was hard to walk because of achilles tendonitis, this was going on for months, worsening. I had jaundice. At times I would get bouts of animalistic fear of death. Eventually my parents found a UNDP official who got me reevaluated and the govt declared me cured because they couldn't admit they misdiagnosed me. I still can't run or do striking martial arts (did em before I got "treated") because my tendons are fucked. I just lift now. I'm also a refuge btw. Escaped with my wife. Good thing I taught myself to be a codemonkey in anticipation of this turn of events. So I know about suffering. It doesn't matter. It's not a problem and it's not a world-shaking issue you're making it out to be. You're simply indoctrinated to loathe the world because sometimes people don't get what they want, like a spoiled kid.

>>18711203
Christianity asserts that there is objective reality full of many other people. It's direct opposite of solipsism.

>>18711242
I know what you feel. I still feel it hard to believe that God is influencing me. But I see myself changing in positive ways. It's incredibly weird to go from atheist to this.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:30:22 2021 No.18711287 >>18711272 And we are left in the exact same position I stated in the first place. The suffering of children is not "well deserved", and, as such, a God who allows it is neither just or loving.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:31:16 2021 No.18711291 >>18711142 OP here. This is the most interesting response in the thread so far. To call into question the validity of God's Plan on the specific basis that it has brought indignity upon incels... Audacious.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:32:28 2021 No.18711293 >>18711287 you don't know for certain God is neither just nor loving because he allows the suffering of children. you don't know what god knows. that's why we need to have faith before understanding.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:32:46 2021 No.18711294 >>18711287 Original sin, this is why humans suffer so. its a good thing Jesus came to die for our sins though :^)

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:34:05 2021 No.18711299

>>18711280
I just proved it. Objectively speaking, the majority of people who arrive at a belief by faith are NECESSARILY believing a falsehood. There are roughly 1 billion Christians, 1 billion Muslims, and 1 billion Hindus. They arrive at their beliefs through faith. Being generous, if any one is correct, the other two are false and 2/3s of those who believe by faith are believing falsehoods. Therefore, faith is an unreliable pathway to truth.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:34:19 2021 No.18711300 >>18711168 He's still allowing the crackhead's mistakes to result in a life of unavenged and pointless suffering for the crackbabies

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:34:56 2021 No.18711303

Why does the monotheistic Christian, Jewish, or Muslim God have to be all-powerful? Maybe He has the power to do everything else claimed, but is bound by some metaphysical constant himself. Maybe God exists, and is in the soul-saving and judging business, but there truly is nobody who has power over absolutely everything.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:35:18 2021 No.18711305 >>18711299 Yes and Christianity is the one truth

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:35:33 2021 No.18711307 >>18711285 See >>18711203

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:36:08 2021 No.18711311 >>18711291 the judge is absolutely rite m8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etOkZ6YBAZY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75LfsSTrrc0

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:36:55 2021 No.18711314

>>18711305
Umm, anon, you seem to be exhibiting one of those three symptoms we talked about... the confused thinking one. If I am right about the delusion, you are 2 for 3. And if you count a "feeling" as a hallucination, you're a big ole' 3 for 3 on the Schizo symptom test

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:37:50 2021 No.18711317

>>18711285
You've had a hard life anon, and I'm sorry for that whether or not you think I'm a patronising git for being sorry. The one thing your suffering does not allow you to do, however, is to dismiss the suffering of others. Suffering is 'earth shaking'. The world is full of unspeakable horrors. It's not that 'sometimes people don't get what they want' is that 'often times people are born to be tortured the whole time and die'.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:38:25 2021 No.18711319 >>18711314 No, there's no confusion in my thinking. You're using this accusation to tar my character. Faith is not schizophrenic.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:40:01 2021 No.18711323 >>18711314 Christ proved his divinity with miracles. Muhammad proved nothing with divinity, the Buddha was just a fatty. >but he didnt post them to his tiktok account! idgaf

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:40:19 2021 No.18711324

>>18711314
>Le epic edgy euphoric religious tester

At least among major faiths, Christianity stands alone as most reasonable because it doesn't expect its followers to find nirvana through futile labors or efforts, deciding that its all-powerful God can handle that aspect

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:40:48 2021 No.18711327

>>18711293
>The reason for suffering must be just because God is just and therefore his reason must be just
Circular thinking. If blind faith helps you through the day, more power to you, but it's just embarrassing when you try to justify it.
>>18711294
I'm not interested in a cult of human sacrifice, thanks.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:41:54 2021 No.18711331 >>18711327 I'm not embarrassed to have faith in God

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:42:22 2021 No.18711333

>>18711324
Buddhists actually believe in heaven. If you do good deeds and have a good inner life, you do reach heaven in buddhism. But that ends, and then when you've exhausted all your good karma, you're reborn as a dog or something. Nirvana goes beyond muh eternal cummies, which probably only lasts a few million years.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:42:41 2021 No.18711334

>>18711319
You failed to follow my demonstration that faith is intrinsically unreliable. You appealed to the idea that you've got the right one and everyone else's faith is wrong. You have absolutely no basis on which to claim your faith is any different from any other religious adherent's.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:43:41 2021 No.18711338 >>18711331 You should be. Or at very least, you should be embarrassed of your reasoning.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:43:47 2021 No.18711340
File: 637 KB, 1080x1920, 1604001389602.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>18711203
>at least in Buddhism
Christianity has explanations too, the problem is they aren't good ones. Buddhism only seems like it has a sanguine answer because its deeply nihilistic.

>inb4 you don't understand Buddhism, read the brihabamaradushi and the singhra rama bidalam

No, Buddhism is nihilist. The concept of Samsara and Anatta and the Arahant, all nihilism. Everything that's not nihilistic in Buddhism is mysticism or hindu holdovers and these all contradict the basic nihilism at the core of Buddhism. Hell even Reincarnation is just a doctrine to prevent people from taking the Samsara concept to its ACTUAL logical conclusion and just offing themselves.

Christianity at least TRIES to provide real spiritual nourishment with concepts like Grace and Redemption, but the weight of human suffering seems to me to be still too much to justify God's plan. Unless there is an afterlife of rewards which we must believe in sight unseen.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:44:23 2021 No.18711344 >>18711334 everything to do with God seems foolish to non-believers

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:44:46 2021 No.18711346 >>18711324 Islam is more reasonable because it came later and includes Jesus and the other prophets in it's religious structure.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:45:37 2021 No.18711350 >>18711340 It is 99% nihilistic, that's true, but the belief that Nirvana exists and that it can be achieved makes it not nihilistic by definition. A nihilist does not believe in Nirvana. >>18711344 pure solipsism

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:45:47 2021 No.18711351 >>18711344 Have you ever stopped and actually, critically examined whether you are falling into cult-like thinking?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:47:45 2021 No.18711361

>>18711317
We're on 4chan, you can do whatever and not apologize, that's the point of the site.
Here's my point. All of that suffering is not a problem. I'm happy with my life, I wouldn't trade it with anyone else. I'm not trying to win "so brave!" points, I just wrote it so people don't give me "you just say that because you never knew suffering!". If you're an atheist, suffering is not world shaking because that's how the world is, the world doesn't give a fuck.

If you're a believer - what is 100 years of suffering to you, if you get to live forever with God in the end? Suffering in this life is nothing. It's like a kid bitching because he has to go get his teeth treated.

>dismiss the suffering of others
Yeah, you're supposed to love them and help them.

>>18711307
I don't understand how your point about context relates to solipsism.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:50:05 2021 No.18711371 >>18711350 >>18711351 It's exactly like Jesus described it would be. I am being persecuted for my faith in Christ. >blessed are you when they reproach and persecute you, and while speaking lies, say every evil thing against you because of me.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:54:05 2021 No.18711393

>>18711371
Ah, yes, the famous persecution complex. Whenever anyone with a differing view comes into contact with you, obviously it is persecution, just like JC warned about! Maybe one day you'll have a crisis of faith and realize your entire belief structure is based on nothing, that there is no reasonable cause for it other than a "feeling" which is in all likelihood simply a refined sensation of death anxiety. Best of luck with that, friend.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:55:05 2021 No.18711399 >>18711361 Look at what you wrote about your experience and then compare it to this >I remember suffering at this one point in my life, but then everything turned out ok

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:56:04 2021 No.18711404 yes

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:56:16 2021 No.18711406 >>18711351 Not him but anything can easily been seen as cult-like from an outsiders perspective. For the atheist this is religion. For the religious it may be the atheistic mindset.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 07:58:42 2021 No.18711417

>>18711393
It's not that you have a differing view, it's that that you're tearing me down and calling me a schizophrenic because I believe in God. You're calling me delusional, saying my beliefs are based on nothing. You're throwing all kinds of evil at me.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:04:58 2021 No.18711443

>>18711262
>Seeking your own good (ie pleasure, safety etc) is a default mode. Seeking the good of others is altruism. Seeking the good of all is Goodness.
yes ,but y would one organism be altruistic for no reason?it can't and genetic survival again comes into the picture(bees for instance).u can surely claim the case of childless couples adopting children but in most if not all cases its mostly because that couple does not wish to be seen as losers (there's also an element of social pressure that indirectly forces them to adopt and provide life children ) or they just wish to live in a life of fantasy ,a possible future where they get to play and watch a child grow to hopefully become successful in the future.and the "evil" behaviour u just described is nothing but an act of "revenge"(more like chimp out) because of others inherent superiority and the lack of those capabilities by the person who is jealous or having a fucked up brain(psychopathy,schizo,etc.).
or it can also be a complicated form of jealousy and a feeling of not having things under one's control like that of the judge from blood meridian.

>In fact modern humans continually ignore low cost reproductive opportunities like sperm banks and third world brides. Your genes and your brain are capable of wanting different things.
who even said u that getting brides from a 3rd world country was an easy task nigga. u can say that being taller and white is a huge advantage compared to the natives and u're rite about that but u also have to be careful when u choose a woman from that place as she may cuck u as soon as she immigrates into the 1st world with a better looking man .In the case sperm banks ,its hard to be a single mother and protect ur child(u're genetic insurance) which is y u need both a mother and a father.i really wished that u were rite about sperm banks man however even this trend is changing to my horror.
https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/sperm-bank-market-generate-4-130000927.html
https://www.jpost.com/health-science/sperm-supply-is-low-so-women-created-an-underground-supply-network-657278
https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-mixed-race-brazil-sperm-imports-from-u-s-whites-are-booming-1521711000
https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/health-wellness/article/3041258/wealthy-single-chinese-women-choosing-white-sperm-donors

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:05:28 2021 No.18711446

>>18711399
Christianity isn't about anything being ok. You can follow God's commands 100% and still get raped by niggers. God isn't Santa, God isn't someone who rewards you for being good. Instead, by being good, you learn to appreciate God, and are capable of choosing to be with Him in the end. Hence "by the faith". If you truly believe, you understand that "good" isn't about being rich or famous or healthy or having sex with thots. Good is doing God's will. You might fuck up in this world and constantly commit sin because you're weak in this life, but as long as you actually want to do God's will, you will be with Him. Conversely if you are sinless but are only doing it with the expectation of being rewarded with something that goes against God's will - for example, sex before marriage - you will refuse to be with Him because sex is more important for you. Simple.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:07:25 2021 No.18711453 >>18710907 Why would I shoot a man before throwing him out of a plane?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:08:06 2021 No.18711457 >>18711417 He hears voices in his head telling him religion is a lie (even if they are just his thoughts) yet has the gall to call believers schizophrenic. Ignore him.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:09:23 2021 No.18711461 >>18711446 Nice headcanon. Still doesn't address the issue in question: if God cannot sacralize you without suffering, then He is not all powerful, if He can, then He is not good.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:10:10 2021 No.18711463

>>18711417
I'm not the guy you are replying to and I'm not defending their tone one way or the other. But surely its not unreasonable if two people are going to have a conversation about faith for the unbeliever to challenge the believer about the possibility that his faith is simply a coping mechanism or a self-delusion? Surely these are even questions that the faithful are bound to ask of themselves?

Maybe you will say that belief and unbelief are equally logical. I myself am not trying to argue that atheism is the default position, that the universe observed by science is the only story worth telling. But the question of why we should attribute kindness and sensibleness to our Creator is a very pressing one and needs to be answered in a deep, articulate, penetrating and descriptive way if we are going to bother trying to answer it at all.

>t. multiple times converted, deconverted and apostatised

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:11:37 2021 No.18711469

>>18711443
Your arguments are based on faulty premises. You claim to present a rational side, but you operate on assumptions that have 0 facts to back them up. I can just as well claim that the majority of childless couples do it out of pure altruism, and it would have as much weight as your statement.

>who even said u that getting brides from a 3rd world country was an easy task nigga.
Imagine thinking getting a 3rd worlder pregnant is hard when you're a burger/west euro.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:13:20 2021 No.18711481 >>18711446 so heaven is filled with afrikan warlords, kiddy-diddling priests and schizophrenic serial killers? cool

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:16:45 2021 No.18711497

>>18711461
It's not really headcanon. It's just that Christianity is way deeper and more multifaceted than people not educated in the topic think.
>if God cannot sacralize you without suffering, then He is not all powerful, if He can, then He is not good.
What does "sacralize" mean in this context? God gave us free will. We chose to sin out of free will. We now reap the results of our actions. Within the context of Christianity, the "suffering" is meaningless because it's over in a heartbeat relative to eternity of bliss. And that's only if you choose to frame it as suffering. I would gladly choose "suffering" over being an atheist again. Once I became Christian, suffering lost meaning to me. I still feel pain and will panic if I start to drown, but it doesn't impact me much anymore. It's insignificant.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:18:49 2021 No.18711505 >>18711481 why is that a bad thing?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:19:35 2021 No.18711513 >>18711481 Yeah, if they accept God's will. Who are you to judge?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:21:15 2021 No.18711524

>>18711469
>Your arguments are based on faulty premises. You claim to present a rational side, but you operate on assumptions that have 0 facts to back them up. I can just as well claim that the majority of childless couples do it out of pure altruism, and it would have as much weight as your statement.
fine i'll take that back and u may have a point

>Imagine thinking getting a 3rd worlder pregnant is hard when you're a burger/west euro.
for real nigga?as i'd said b4 finding a 3rd worlder to bang if u're a 5'11 white dude is not hard because u would be significantly taller and attractive than the natives.banging a women is 1 thing and marrying her by bringing her back to the west is another.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:22:35 2021 No.18711531

>>18711443
>evil and altruism both have reasons behind them
This is a deep question, but not entirely the most relevant one. The argument I was making is that human motivations are based in human psychology, not a raw calculus of genetic gain. Our psychology evolved under Darwinian conditions, sure, but it is still its own thing with its own ends and objectives. As I was saying with the sperm bank stuff these objectives rarely line up with procreation as such. We do things all the time that limit our reproductive fitness, and in fact more successful people are LESS likely to reproduce. This does not mean we've escaped the Darwinian rat race, it simply means that the rules we are beholden to are an imperfect analogue for the rules of gene propagation. Two different games.

As to the question of whether all Good and Evil sentiments can be reduced to a rational calculus of tit for tat, I think not. It's possible to hate people beyond the scope of the harm they pose and possible to love people beyond the scope of their usefulness. Its possible to hate yourself, possible to love others more than yourself, possible to desire their good (or their harm) only for its own sake. But this can never be proven because rationalisations can almost always be conjured up for any given action. I'm simply trying to honestly report my subjective experience.

But even if I'm wrong about everything above, there is still the question of how to respond to our creator (we are assuming in this thread that there is a Creator to respond to) given the excess of unjustified sufffering in the world. Saying that we live in a morally neutral universe of evolved beings executing their darwinian code does not resolve this question, because we ARE those beings and we DO suffer and so we are standing here, staring into the void, wondering how a hypothetical Creator could possibly justify this as his Plan. The premise of the question precludes atheism as an answer. And 'atheism' was what I picked up from you when you started trying to answer the Theodicy with statements about how we are just evolved gene maximisers.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:23:42 2021 No.18711535 File: 42 KB, 764x401, 2085ABA1-3198-4E50-8DF4-F8BB56659842.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>18711102 Ages mate.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:24:02 2021 No.18711536 Guuuuys, once again, Jesus is Lord. Thank you, good bye.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:24:19 2021 No.18711538

>>18711497
>What does "sacralize" mean in this context?
Allow you to enjoy eternal bliss.
>God gave us free will. We chose to sin out of free will.
He already knew that we were going to sin when he gave us free will, thus condemning us to suffering. Or He is not all-knowing.
>Within the context of Christianity, the "suffering" is meaningless because it's over in a heartbeat relative to eternity of bliss.
It does not need to exist in the first place. God is all-powerful.
>Once I became Christian, suffering lost meaning to me.
Doesn't address the dilemma. What we are discussing is the fact that the Christian God is incompatible with reality. He cannot be all-knowing, all-powerful and good, and use suffering as a way to sacralize living beings. You have to give one of the three attributes up.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:25:11 2021 No.18711542 >>18711453 CIA can fly. Bane hates him for not flying him out of the cave. CIA could always rescue the cave dwellers: he chose not to.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:26:36 2021 No.18711544

>>18711117
im reminded of the clerk's tale from the Canterbury tales. Here a nobleman, in order to test the faithfulness of his peasant wife, pretends to kill her first and second born, then pretends to divorce her and forces her to prepare the wedding for his new wife. She quietly submits to everything. This abuse takes place over the course of roughly 12 years, enough for her children to grow up. at the wedding it is revealed it was all just a test of faith, and her children are alive.

The question is now, was the nobleman just? does a test of faith which makes the suffering at the end turn out to be a ruse, justify the 12 years of suffering?
does the suffering become null once the truth is revealed? the tale leaves a bad taste in the entire travelling company, does it to you?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:27:08 2021 No.18711547 >>18711505 >>18711513 the absolute state

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:29:34 2021 No.18711560

> if God cannot sacralize you without suffering, then He is not all powerful
Genuine question, but how do you know it is even possible to be sacralized without suffering? what if it just an impossibility in the same way it is impossible for a circle to be a square? I mean, would the state of sacrilzation be the same if you didn't go through the suffering?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:30:27 2021 No.18711563 >>18711560 >God is all-powerful simple as

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:31:03 2021 No.18711565

>>18711497
I agree that Christianity is deep.

>we choose to sin and reap those results
But others reap them too. I'm a law abiding God fearing man whose family is then eaten by cannibals. I turn against God in my grief and am hit by a train on the way home from the hospital, dying an unrepentant atheist. I burn in Hell forever. Many such cases.

The cannibals sin turned me against God. if my Sin is not believing hard enough, then I'm being given an eternity of punishment for not being strong enough to bare the suffering of the mortal world with more gratitude or fortitude or wisdom. But these traits are not under my control. And if the suffering of mortal life is brief compared to eternal Heaven, how much more unfair is it that I will be judged only for the tiny time that I spent as a limited dumb pain-riddled ape in a world that was on fire with sin, doubt and suffering? The prophet Elijah says that the ones saved from damnation will number some 12,000. Billions of people have lived and will live. Most will never hear Christ's name spoken aloud. So many innocents will suffer eternally for the sake of your 12,000, anon, and even you may not be among them in the end.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:31:04 2021 No.18711566

>>18711547
why do you assume it to be so obvious? what is this obvious knowledge of good and bad for you based on? if it is so obvious, then it must be easy for you to explain it here, refuting it with such empty posts like you just did, is not helping anyone, besides making you feel better about yourself.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:31:29 2021 No.18711570 >>18711361 The point is that the suffering that you went through doesnt even scratch the surface of the suffering people think of when making the evil argument

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:33:06 2021 No.18711577 >>18711560 God created us and the reality we exist in. He decided what he would require of us, and seems to have decided, according to the Bible anyway, that most of us will fail the test.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:33:36 2021 No.18711581

>>18711563
Yes, but my question is, how do you know it is even possible? It's not as straight forward as the squared circle, example, or do you consider that to be a possibilty as well? I feel that we are limited in our knowledge and understanding of existence, so we don't know yet, or can't know, if it is possible at all. Assuming God is omniscient, he does know.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:35:54 2021 No.18711591

>>18711581
Yeah, the problem with the "all-powerful" attribute already comes into question with simple logic games:
>Can God create a stone so heavy that He himself cannot lift.
This is before we even get to the question of suffering. If it is impossible to do, then there is someone or something bigger than the creator of this world

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:40:20 2021 No.18711611

>>18711591
Well, the answers to those problems are given by humans with a human understanding, so we can't really answer in his name, can we?
I am assuming that we are not all knowing, while God is, so perhaps the latter assumption is why I am making mistakes. I also assume that it is okay to assume something first and leave the possibilty for the assumption to be false, but how do you falsify God's omniscience?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:41:02 2021 No.18711619

>>18711361
You are right that atheists don't face the Problem of Evil, they face the problem of nihilism instead. But that's not the topic of the thread.

Your point about theists who raise the problem of evil being like kids who won't get their teeth treated is interesting, but still off the mark. If the kid does not understand the purpose of the treatment his suffering makes no sense to him and he cannot endorse it. If it does, then he does not face the Problem of Evil.

If you say that the child should trust his parent even in cases where he does not understand, then this presupposes that his parent has fostered sufficient trust, or that the child is not able, through sufficiently shrewd judgment, to make decisions about whether his parent is harmful to him or not. We can never know god, but we can know ourselves: that is the genius of Ivan Karamazov's argument, he is pointing out that the suffering of the world will never be reconcilable with goodness in the puny human mind, and therefore all (morally sane) humans must reject God as being odious and incomprehensible - something like the unknowable terrors of Lovecraftian cosmology, Azathoth, Cthulu etc

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:43:32 2021 No.18711632

>>18711350
Yeah, absolutely, so (like I said) the bits that are not nihilistic are the bits that contradict its basic nihilism: "Desire creates Suffering and you do not exist as a self, so you should desire to get yourself into this state that I'm in called Enlightenment."

Like all nihilistic credos, it has to contradict itself to sell itself. Glib but true

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:44:38 2021 No.18711640

>>18711531
>Our psychology evolved under Darwinian conditions, sure, but it is still its own thing with its own ends and objectives.
wat do u mean by "still its own thing".r u suggesting that there are underlying forces other than biology(darwinian) at play like what deepak chopra says?u know things like quantum consciouness and all other woo woo.
i would also like to highlight that all forms of life are not perfectly optimised but are rather just good enough to survive in a given environment.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:51:20 2021 No.18711668 >>18711538 There's no dilemma. I am saying there's no suffering in the real world. Find me an atom of it. It's a concept invented by humans. It does not exist unless you want it to exist.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:52:04 2021 No.18711671

>>18711611
>I also assume that it is okay to assume something first and leave the possibilty for the assumption to be false, but how do you falsify God's omniscience?
With the dilemma of free will contrasted to God's goodness. Does free will exist or not? If it exists then God is not omniscient - he cannot know what we will decide to do. If free will does not exist, then the issue of suffering and eternal damnation is even more discrediting to Christianity.

>>18711632
>"Desire creates Suffering and you do not exist as a self, so you should desire to get yourself into this state that I'm in called Enlightenment."
They say that you shouldn't desire Nirvana, just know that its out there and perform the practices that will lead you to it, without any expectations. Ultimately, buddhism is a religion of practice, and it is also esoteric, so this cloud of nihilism is kind of meant to prepare you for direct experience through meditation.

>>18711668
Child rape, idk.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:52:30 2021 No.18711672

>>18711611
The necessity of causing your creation to suffer is something that you have to assume in order for God to be Good. So the evidence you have is that either creation necessitates suffering or God is not Good. You don't get to resolve this by 'assuming' that God is Good and that therefore suffering must be necessary. In fact suffering is SO prevalent and nasty and SO antithetical to our native instincts about what is good that we can only conclude that any justification God has for our aggregately painful existence as a species can only make sense in his non-human mind, and thus is not something that we - humans - can ever endorse. When Christ was on the cross He cursed God for abandoning Him. That's where we are right now. So honestly screw your smug, callous assumptions.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 08:59:00 2021 No.18711693
File: 1.26 MB, 2048x1434, 1608383722915.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>18711671
>don't desire Enlightenment but work for it
>the nihilism is intentional to prepare you
>its esoteric tho
>its a religion of practice

Humans are not creatures of practice they are creatures of expectation, goal seeking. If you make a goal of Enlightenment you have a goal, no getting around that. Especially not with the word 'esoteric' which refers, in this case, to literally nothing. Anything that doesn't make sense can be called esoteric.

It may be an empirical fact of the human mind that defocusation results in euphoria due to eliminating stress responses associated with planning. This does not mean that Buddhists get a pass for their religion of explicit contradictions.

True religion attempts to grapple with Man's nature as it really is, with Good and Evil, Choice, Identity and most importantly, Tragedy. The real and coherent wisdom that comes from grappling with these operatic human themes is what can truly be called esoterica.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:01:59 2021 No.18711702 >>18711591 >simple logic games Your 'simple logic game' only work on the basis that God is a physical being. Far out anon...

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:02:59 2021 No.18711706

>>18710886
>The world is so full of pointless suffering, he argues, that any morally sane person cannot consent to endorse God's plan (at least not from the pitifully limited perspective of the human mind).
What makes the suffering poitless? What if the people who suffered "pointlessly" simply failed their tests? God sent them hardships so that they may walk out from the other side a better men. But they failed. The survivor's mistake makes you think that they suffered pointlessly, but they simply failed. Those that didn't - became better men, they value life in its full potential. They value quiet, calmness, harmony. They don't pursue destructive trends, etc.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:03:46 2021 No.18711711

>>18711671
Why can't he know what we will do? Are you saying because he knows it before we do it, we are not free in doing so? I don't understand that.

>>18711672
I believe you misunderstand the intentions of my posts. I am really not understanding the arguments given, because of the assumptions I am making. I am not saying they are truth. Isn't the not all knowing person smug for saying that an all knowing being is incorrect? I don't understand what is bad about the necessity of suffering, if it is the possible way to have it. Like a 'you can't have your cake and eat it too' type of situation.
>In fact suffering is SO prevalent and nasty and SO antithetical to our native instincts about what is good that we can only conclude that any justification God has for our aggregately painful existence as a species can only make sense in his non-human mind, and thus is not something that we - humans - can ever endorse.
I doubt this a little, for we make people suffer as well, and people through history had no problem in making people suffer. Isn't this a relativistic view?

Please, I am discussing in good faith. Don't throw insults at me. If you think I have retarded takes, then you can either help me understand it, or ignore it. Doing neither is not fruitful, unless you want to make yourself feel better or make me feel bad.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:04:56 2021 No.18711717 File: 56 KB, 700x701, 95abab7ece31abcfb22867b5803384248b-24-saw-puppet.rsquare.w700.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>18711706 so god is basically this nigga lol

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:05:53 2021 No.18711722 >>18711717 Pretty much, I guess.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:07:17 2021 No.18711725

>>18711531
>there is still the question of how to respond to our creator (we are assuming in this thread that there is a Creator to respond to) given the excess of unjustified sufffering in the world
u wish to hear arguments like proof by contradiction?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:11:24 2021 No.18711736

>>18711565
>I turn against God in my grief
No, you see the results of sin and double down on Christianity.
> I burn in Hell forever.
No, you just don't resurrect. Same result as atheism.

>>18711570
So what is that suffering? Why is that different? You can claim "my holocaust" and then you have people like Frankl who went through it okay, who didn't suffer even though they felt pain. Suffering doesn't exist. Pain exists, suffering doesn't.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:13:57 2021 No.18711755

>>18711693
Let me define esoteric. Esoteric in the way I used it now means something that has multiple layers, and is meant to be understood by multiple people at different levels of mastery. So if you practice meditation, you understand that there is a difference between a goal and a desire. You wake up in the morning, you need to piss and then you set a goal to go to the toilet. That is not a desire. A desire is an emotional entanglement. If you desire enlightenment, you yearn for it, you are running away from something or towards bliss or whatever. You have to practice without this desire. Sure, you systematize your behavior, in accordance to the goal you've set for yourself, but there is no emotional component to your actions.

>It may be an empirical fact of the human mind that defocusation results in euphoria due to eliminating stress responses associated with planning.
It's more than that. It is a different state of mind from the waking, rationalizing state that people are used to. Probably just because you are giving your mind more time to understand what's going on. So you're up at your computer, hopped up on coffee and nicotine, scheming late at night. Your plans are going to be shallow and probably fail or get you in trouble. You meditate, and you are able to perceive both external and internal components of your plan in a way that is invisible to your previous frantic state.

>True religion attempts to grapple with Man's nature as it really is, with Good and Evil, Choice, Identity and most importantly, Tragedy.
This is why buddhism is a religion of practice. When you understand any of these concepts on a surface level, it's very easy to enter delusion. But just because you understand that they are ultimately meaningless when you are in the grave, does not mean that you cannot understand multiple facets of these concepts using your conventional perception. They are meaningless ultimately, but they are salient here and now.

It's a religion of practice! This is the central point. If you do not practice it, and you simply theorize about its concepts, then you will not be able to enter the esoteric meaning of it.

>>18711702
So God can't move physical objects lmao?

>>18711711
>Are you saying because he knows it before we do it, we are not free in doing so?
Yeah, that's the whole point of free will. But I guess he could know what the probability is of us doing something and that wouldn't conflict with free will.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:14:31 2021 No.18711759 >Rather insane with the rest of the world, than sane alone.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:15:45 2021 No.18711768

>>18711671
Yeah child rape is bad. I don't know, I guess I'm on a whole different plane with my perspective of this. I don't see pain etc as bad. People voluntarily subject themselves to pain. Suffering is ultimately a problem of missed expectations imo. Cognitive behaviour therapy style.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:18:22 2021 No.18711783

>>18711768
You are literally this guy:
>I remember suffering at this one point in my life, but then everything turned out ok
That's the solipsism I was talking about. There is suffering that is even beyond your scope of understanding, and to make matters worse, the people who suffer from it have no idea that there's an afterlife or reincarnation, or anything else. They are in a state of pure horror. That's the whole point of the thread.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:19:21 2021 No.18711787

>>18711640
I agree that things are just 'good enough' and that maybe the crux of my response to you in general: its inappropriate to say that all we are is gene maximisers, because the genes are simply what are cells are constructed from our mind is constructed to operate in an environment far downstream from the game the genes are playing. It operates in service to those genes to a large degree, making us feel horny or aggressive etc, but it is not fully isomorphic to the needs of the genes and instead it operates on principles of human psychology that appear to include sadism, obsession, fetishism, fallacy, self-delusion, altruism, theism and countless other feelings and behaviours that make OUR human world more than a mere contest of genes. But none of this gets at the topic of the thread, which is theodicy. The argument that everything is down to gene propagation behaviour is just an attempt to sidestep the question

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:20:12 2021 No.18711789

>>18711755
>So God can't move physical objects lmao?
God created the Earth, he can destroy entire cities, bring mountains crumbling.
I'm sure he could push the earth off its rotational axis lol.

>but like what if he madea rock as big as the universe!
Sorry anon but I dont have time to engage with such stonerisms.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:21:58 2021 No.18711798 >>18711789 >imagine getting BTFO by the stone argument

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:23:50 2021 No.18711808 >>18711798 You are attempting to reduce something greater than yourself down to a physical level so it is easily understandable for your monkey brain.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:25:31 2021 No.18711817 >>18711808 It has nothing to do with the physical level nigger. It's a logical paradox.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:26:32 2021 No.18711822

>>18711755
>Enlightenment is more than defocusation
I'm sure it is, but if Christianity is right that Grace and Tragedy etc are more than "ultimately meaningless" then I guess there's more to life than mere Enlightenment, just like there's more to life than being high on mushrooms.

>religion of practice
>desire is different from a goal
You already know what I'm going to say here. Goals serve desires. You wouldn't have the toilet goal if you didn't have the piss desire. You wouldn't have the Enlightenment goal if you didn't have the "replace suffering with bliss" desire. There's no getting out of it with redefinitions. If you deny having a reason to practice there's no reason to practice. Practice is simply an external behaviour driven by some internal want. You can ignore the want but its still driving your car here.

>esoteric means there's multiple layers means 2deep4u
If its only something that I can unlock on yogi bhikku level 41 then I suppose I can't refute it. Just know that Scientologists make the same argument

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:28:19 2021 No.18711835 >>18711768 >child eaten by wolves chose to suffer yeah fuck 'em due

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:28:39 2021 No.18711839

>>18711783
Okay, I understand your point now. I've been in a state of pure horror couple times, I did not believe in afterlife at that point, but I understand that here's where the argument for solipsism comes in - for me it was somehow ok, for someone else it was incredibly awful.

How is being subjected to something incredibly awful for a couple seconds necessarily evil? I do not understand why suffering is evil. I don't believe in evil, in actuality. I think that's what I'm trying to say.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:31:04 2021 No.18711850 >>18711835 What would the buddhists say? That they did something in a past life to deserve it?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:33:32 2021 No.18711867 >>18711817 Who says God is limited by logic?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:34:07 2021 No.18711872

>>18711725
um, expand?

>>18711736
You are just saying that the grief stricken father (or it could be a kid or a mentally disabled person or whatever) has to be wise enough to see that their pain is a 'good' thing even though we have no reason to believe that apart from not wanting God to be a cunt. And if they don't have your 'wisdom' (of making unfounded assumptions based on apparent wish fulfilment) they will suffer the consequences and be judged.

>Not Hell just missing out on Heaven
That's just your headcannon, its not accurate to scripture. And its fucking unfair anyway. Tortured ignorance followed by Oblivion is not a fair deal in any humanly conceivable universe.

>inb4 God is not humanly conceivable
Yeah that's the point, by HUMAN metrics (ie the only metrics we have access to) an omnipotent creator that created this world would be a total CUNT

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:35:44 2021 No.18711889 >>18711850 they would say "dude weed don't like care because there's no you and no kid if you really think about it its all one thing, except when you are thinking about it so don't think about it, ya dig?"

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:35:53 2021 No.18711891

>>18711822
>Grace and Tragedy etc are more than "ultimately meaningless"
They are meaningless from a Buddhist perspective. You can achieve Grace through meditation, even Christian meditation. It's just that it does not take you out of the circle of rebirths, it only gives you a favorable birth after this life.

>You wouldn't have the toilet goal if you didn't have the piss desire.
We're just talking about the definition of a word here. Desire from a Buddhist perspective is something that is charged with emotion. You don't get emotional about pissing. If we go at a deeper esoteric level (;^) we could say that desire is something filled with karmic repercussions. Karmic repercussions precede and succeed desire. That is a desire. You can start practice due to a desire, but eventually the desire subsides and is replaced with neutral action.

>If its only something that I can unlock on yogi bhikku level 41
Think of it as the difference between your normal state of mind and your state of mind after you had a psychedelic experience for the first time. If nothing else, you understand references to psychedelic experiences that you did not understand previously.

>>18711839
In this context, evil is unnecessary suffering.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:38:52 2021 No.18711910 >>18711889 Lol but I mean like the asian ones with shaved heads and orange robes.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:41:41 2021 No.18711931 >>18711867 Well can He or not?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:46:49 2021 No.18711965

>>18711872
I'm saying that you gave one scenario where a person acts in a certain manner. I gave you a different one where that person acts in a different manner. It's not really an argument. It's more of, we're both grasping to define/express our values or attitude towards suffering/evil. For you it's one thing, for me it's another thing. You're trying to convince me that life is bad. I'm trying to convince you that it's good. It's kinda like that.

>That's just your headcannon, its not accurate to scripture.
>The Catechism of the Catholic Church which, when published in 1992, Pope John Paul II declared to be "a sure norm for teaching the faith",[44] defines hell as a freely chosen consequence of refusing to love God. "To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called "hell."
I meant hell like it's a place where you go after some higher authority judges you and then demons torture you forever. You can kinda see what I was trying to say in that post but it was poorly worded.

>Yeah that's the point, by HUMAN metrics
And by a kid's metric eating all the candy is the best and going to school is evil torture and suffering and his mom's a CUNT for making him clean his room.
And by an ants metric why the fuck is this piece of concrete here surely if there was a higher being it would've put sugar syrup there.
And we humans are notoriously shit at predicting the consequences of our actions.
So yeah human metrics suck to the point we have to rely on inhuman (but human-created), external ones like math, scientific method, etc.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:47:03 2021 No.18711968 >>18711755 Is it still free will if that probability is 100%? I don't see how it contradicts free will.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:49:09 2021 No.18711985 >>18711968 Free will implies unpredictability. Unpredictability denies omniscience.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:51:26 2021 No.18711997

>>18711931
This is a faulty question because it forces the person answering to reduce God to logical limitations; to model God in logic and human limitations, when it's explicitly stated that God is not limited in that manner. It's meaningless.

>>18711891
I disagree with this definition of evil. We constantly undergo unnecessary suffering but we successfully ignore most of it, or even derive pleasure as a result of it. It's all very muddled to me.
Oh look science says there's no evil i fucking love science:
https://slate.com/technology/2011/09/does-evil-exist-neuroscientists-say-no.html
Now I'm not saying that this article is true. I'm saying that your understanding of evil is, yeah, solipsist. I am not a philosopher, I don't think I can offer you more than you can get just from googling, desu.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:56:11 2021 No.18712023 >>18711985 Does that mean it is impossible to know before a decision is made what the decision will be?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:58:12 2021 No.18712029

>>18711997
>This is a faulty question because it forces the person answering to reduce God to logical limitations
Seems like a cope to me.

>>18711997
Child rape is evil. Sadism is evil. Treachery is evil.
But in the context of the thread, evil is allowing horrendous suffering to occur for no reason at all. It is evil for a creator to set up a system that has suffering in it, especially the degree of suffering that exists in the world, if it is not necessary.

>>18712023
No? You can infer what the decision might be, but if there's no chance that the decision will be completely nonsensical, then there is no free will.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 09:59:35 2021 No.18712038 >>18711985 Lol just be able to see all of the time at the same time retard do you even 4 dimensional perception

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:00:57 2021 No.18712047

>>18711891
Buddhism doesn't HAVE a coherent perspective, as I've discussed.

>we're just talking about definitions of words
>proceeds to redefine desire
So Samsara is just being over-emotional? Or its just about the desires that have 'karmic repercussions'? So its just about not doing the things that rock the karma boat, and you've defined those boat-rocking actions as "anything that doesn't serve the state of enlightenment"?

In that case Buddhism is begging the question. Samsara is defined by avoiding 'karmic repercussions', which are in turn defined relative to Enlightenment, so the rationale for Enlightenment is self-referential.

And you are continuing to insist that its not logically inconsistent to say that a practice can be perpetrated without a desire.

Your Buddhism honestly sounds like a brain bug. No more rigorous or coherent than that other anon who thinks he is intelligently defending 'faith'.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:01:15 2021 No.18712049 >>18712029 >Seems like a cope to me. Seems stupid and close minded to think God is bound by human laws. Evil of absence of good. God didn't create evil, we just assign a name to a non-existant thing, like we did to vacuum. Congrats.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:05:48 2021 No.18712074 >>18712029 Then why is omniscience impossible? Or do you consider inference not the same as knowing?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:08:14 2021 No.18712088

>>18711965
>You're trying to convince me that life is bad. I'm trying to convince you that it's good.
No its self-evidently bad and you have no right to disrespect the suffering of the majority of life by saying otherwise, you should instead be trying to convince me that this suffering world could be the product of a benevolent good. But in the light of the fact that children live and die in meaningless unavenged pain all the time it doesn't seem to me that such prove is coherently possible, and handwaves about faith don't count.

We're not both 'grasping', my position is Ivan Karamazov's position and its a very clear one.

>by a kid or an ant's metric
I got into this with another anon above. The kid only has his kid brain to work with. Maybe his mum has been nice enough and protective enough so far that he trusts her wisdom. Maybe she's tortured him and fucked him over. In the latter case, even with the handicap of being more stupid and ignorant than his cunt mother, he's not obligated to like her or accept her rule. Your mother analogy presupposes two fatal lies: that we have only a kid's capacity to decide about the nature of suffering (especially the pointless torturous suffering of innocents that pervades world history) and that God has shown as much care for us as a species as the average mother shows for her child. Both assumptions are wrong wrong wrong

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:10:15 2021 No.18712097 >>18710886 It's more of an anti-catholic and organized religion than an atheist screed. The real Jesus appears in the story.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:10:48 2021 No.18712102

>>18712047
You've lost your mind! I guess my serene posts so utterly disturbed you that you've fallen in an animalistic state.

>So Samsara is just being over-emotional?
Probably. I had a vision that during my last birth, I was really attracted to tits and wanted to suck them so I chose to be reborn again.

>Or its just about the desires that have 'karmic repercussions'?
Think of karma like this. Someone butthurt you, you're already filled with karma, so instead of releasing the butthurt, you let it overcome you, so you entangle even more karma in your already immense ball of karma. This will force you into error and further delusion, which you might not see the fruits of until a thousand lives down the line.

>So its just about not doing the things that rock the karma boat, and you've defined those boat-rocking actions as "anything that doesn't serve the state of enlightenment"?
No, it's about practicing meditation.

>Samsara is defined by avoiding 'karmic repercussions', which are in turn defined relative to Enlightenment, so the rationale for Enlightenment is self-referential.
You cannot avoid karmic repercussions without meditation.

>And you are continuing to insist that its not logically inconsistent to say that a practice can be perpetrated without a desire.
Define desire.

>Your Buddhism honestly sounds like a brain bug. No more rigorous or coherent than that other anon who thinks he is intelligently defending 'faith'.
Buddhism is famous for its paradoxes though. I don't want to attack Christians to promote Buddhism by the way, I hope no one else but me achieves Enlightenment, but Buddhism doesn't cope with the fact that it has paradoxes. It tells you to meditate in order to understand them.

>>18712049
Hurting people for pleasure is the absence of good? Seems to me like that's the presence of evil.

>>18712074
I said that inference is good enough to be considered omniscience. But you can never have 100% certainty that a creature with free will will act a certain way.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:12:16 2021 No.18712113

>>18712049
Seems deluded and tautological to say that God must be Good on the basis that you've defined him to be a creature who is capable of metaphysically justifying our clearly-bad world.

You've got no leg to stand on so you invoke to capacity of an infinite creature to manifest contradictions. You're like that kid in the playground who would always insist that their character was "laser proof and lava proof and death proof" etc etc

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:14:11 2021 No.18712119 2021 and atheists still think God is a man in the sky.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:14:49 2021 No.18712123 >>18712119 It's literally Christian dogma that He is a man in the sky.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:15:46 2021 No.18712128 >>18712123 If youre a stupid farmer who cant conceive of anything else maybe.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:16:22 2021 No.18712132 >>18712128 I'm serious.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:24:32 2021 No.18712170

>>18711787
>its inappropriate to say that all we are is gene maximisers
we're and we're hardwired(to the best it could that was selected by evolution) to do just that and it's a hard long process with several constraints and room for errors.

>but it is not fully isomorphic to the needs of the genes and instead it operates on principles of human psychology that appear to include sadism, obsession, fetishism, fallacy, self-delusion, altruism, theism and countless other feelings and behaviours that make OUR human world more than a mere contest of genes.
again i don't get u when u say"human psychology" because it is a product of biology and as far as things like altruism goes like the case of foster parents,there are many imperfect traits in us that adds up to give errors and badly optimised behaviour and some of these behaviours have negligile effects in our biology and were not weeded because natural selection didn't demand it .for instance y do we like cute things?cuz they're baby like and if u have repulsive attitude to baby like things there are really high chances u canend up hurting ur kid when he's caught doing something mischievous.y do we sometimes get a sense of positive joy when helping even a stranger who is in trouble?it is simply an evolutionary by-product of highly social creatures that had ensured the survival of ur ancestors .now u're obviously going to observe these behaviours only in a spectrum where some people are less altruistic than others but all in all there is that genetic component in us all to be a bit altruistic.

>>18711872
>um, expand?
nvm u made it clear at the end of this post.>>18711787

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:34:10 2021 No.18712202

>>18712102
>i guess my serene posts
You may have been joking here but i've observed exactly this kind of arrogance in Buddhists IRL

>Karma is being pathological
Cool. This proves nothing about 'cycles of re-birth', it just amounts to 'don't obsess needlessly'. Didn't need to be told that. You've weakened/diluted Samsara so badly in an attempt to avoid the nihilism charge against Strong Samsara that the concept has almost vanished entirely.

>no its about practicing meditation
I've already said that meditation and the psychological state associated with Enlightenment could have benefits, but that does not entitle them to be a religion, much less a religion that purports to reduce all other concepts to meaninglessness. Taking a breather and getting some calm is good, I agree

>You cannot avoid karmic repercussion without meditation
Coz you can't free yourself from Samsara/desire by recognising Anatta and becoming alive to the present moment of Oneness... Yeah I get it, this is where we started from. Now I say that the Samsara/Anatta combo is nihilistic, and that for Enlightenment to be worked towards it must be desired, and that Reincarnation is a trick to make Buddhists not commit suicide and we're back into the whole routine.

You can go ahead and define Karma in order to serve your purpose of portraying the quest for Enlightenment as neccessary, but you should acknowledge that's what you are doing: begging the damn question! Its circular reasoning mixed in with the proposition that the best we can do in our spiritual lives is enter some liminal state of euphoria, as opposed to confronting and transcending the direct ETHICAL challenges of a suffering-ridden universe as the Christians attempt to do through their focus on Grace, Redemption and Tragedy. Buddhist meaning, at least BEFORE you hit the 'esoteric' para-truths of Enlightenment, is all about running away from Suffering towards euphoria (or oblivion). Christians run TOWARDS Suffering and towards Responsibility, Pathos and their bleeding, terrified, dangerous fellow man. Indeed, the gospel of Mark tells them to "take up serpents". This is a far more noble and humanistic goal than mere Enlightenment. The East was miles behind the West in Technology and Industry, but they were LIGHTYEARS behind the West in terms of spiritual gumption and noblesse. No wonder

>Define desire
You're the one playing the definition games. I accepted your distinction between the desire to piss and the goal of reaching the toilet but you shrunk away from even that.

>Buddhism is famous for its paradoxes
I assume you mean koans and such. Paradoxes actually set up coherent-seeming contradictions, like "this sentence is a lie". Buddhist koans are just intended to be mentally jarring like "what is the sound of one hand clapping?" Its all about inducing liminal states/hypnotism, not about having an intellectually worthy or rigorous religion/philosophy. Pure cognitive disorientation with no substance.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:35:24 2021 No.18712207

>>18712113
Nobody defined God. He has certain properties attributed to Him but there is no clear exhaustive definition.

>clearly-bad world
Meaningless value judgement. I like this world.

You're the person who cannot conceive that things beyond him exist. "Such and such cannot exist because it cannot exist! It just cannot! The world is bad! I am scared of suffering!"

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:43:27 2021 No.18712237
File: 286 KB, 527x343, ijkx.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>18712170
You seem to still be saying that because we, as a species, evolved in an environment where the genes that hardcode our reproduction were trying propagate themselves, our human psychology serves nothing but gene propagation. That's simply not true. Or at least its not true by necessity and there is a great deal of our human behaviour, cuckoldry for instance, that serves only human psychology and not gene production.

Let me come at it another way:

Have you ever seen fantasia? The famous bit with Mickey Mouse and the Sorcerer's hat? He uses magic to animate the broom to fill the cauldron. But the cauldron fills up and the broom keeps filling, with water going everywhere. Mickey can't stop it even after attacking the broom.

Mickey is the genes and we are the animated broom. He created us for a purpose but he does not fully comprehend us, we have our OWN nature, our OWN purpose that he could not fully see when he created us, because he was shortsighted, he could only see up to the point of instructing us to bring water to the cauldron.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:45:55 2021 No.18712250 >>18712207 You like this world where deformed babies are porn in agonising pain and killed before their first birthday. You are a cunt.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:51:54 2021 No.18712270 >>18712250 >Some people feel pain so you aren't allowed to enjoy things K

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:53:41 2021 No.18712276

>>18712202
>You may have been joking here but i've observed exactly this kind of arrogance in Buddhists IRL
I was joking, but every time I talk about Buddhism with people, they get irrationally angry at me and try to prove something. I think I have a smug attitude about it, like I know something they don't, but that's fine.

I'm not trying to protect Buddhism from the charge of nihilism, I just made an autistic comment about the definition of something that is nihilistic. If Nirvana has value in Buddhism, then Buddhism cannot be nihilist. From an autistic perspective. The whole argument about the desire to achieve Nirvana is retarded, because desire and Buddhist desire are two different things.

>Its circular reasoning mixed in with the proposition that the best we can do in our spiritual lives is enter some liminal state of euphoria
That's not what Nirvana is. There are many ways to look at the Buddhist world view. If you start with the Four Noble Truths, you start with the world. You want to escape the suffering of the world, and nothing satisfies, and you eventually reach the teachings of the Buddha, which say that suffering is inescapable without getting rid of desire. This is the same thing you learn in the Bible. You could say that Christianity is nihilistic too in this way. How many passages are in the Bible about denying the world and the self?

You can then look at Buddhism from the more interesting perspective, and that is from the eternal perspective. What is more likely - that you live for 90 years and then you spend eternity in heaven, or that you live for the entire length of existence, until you achieve Nirvana. From this perspective, Nirvana is not a state of mind, it's a liberation from eternal recurrence, and then you enter "neither existence, nor non-existence." This isn't a koan. This is a true paradox. What is neither existence, nor non-existence? Why choose these terms?

>Christians run TOWARDS Suffering and towards Responsibility, Pathos and their bleeding, terrified, dangerous fellow man.
Are you implying that there are no Christian monks, and no lay Buddhists?

>The East was miles behind the West in Technology and Industry, but they were LIGHTYEARS behind the West in terms of spiritual gumption and noblesse. No wonder
You think this might have something to do with a little thing called RACE?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 10:59:18 2021 No.18712288

>>18712237
>cuckoldry for instance, that serves only human psychology and not gene production.
what???? cuckoldry is a fantastic strategy employed by females for ensuring genetic survival(by using betabuxx provider's resources on chad's child that also contains the genes of mother who cucked her husband) buddy.u do know that concealed ovulation in women was selected to promote cuckoldry rite?

>Have you ever seen fantasia?
no
correct me if i'm wrong but i think that u've intepreted "human psyche" as something that is completely new and an emergent property of life itself with its own patterns almost like where quantum mechanics and general relativity(or even newtonian gravity for that matter) not being similar or one thing having something under it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 11:02:50 2021 No.18712300 >>18712288 >>18712237 >one thing having something under it. forget that sentence

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 11:06:48 2021 No.18712313 >>18712300 shit ,i meant forget that part

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 11:18:06 2021 No.18712361

>>18712276

1/2

>Im autistically right
I'm saying that Buddhism is nihilistic, except where it contradicts itself due to being built on shitty nihilist foundations. That's what i've been saying all thread. Being 'autistically' right, in this instance, is failing to engage with my wide-ranging, profound and encompassing critique of your shitty pseudo-religion.

>desire and buddhist desire are two different things
And yet if you dilute the buddhist definition of desire to be something like 'harmful obsession' as you've done above (I'm ignoring your karma-based definitions of desire because they employ circular reasoning) then you don't have a religion so much as a self help book.

>That's not Nirvana, you gotta start with the x y z to truly understand
More opportunities for you to employ circular reasoning or open ended 'esoteric' justifications. What you know about Nirvana is what you have experienced of it, which can be explained psychologically just like we explain drug trips. Everything else is circular Buddhist word games and gatekeeping for a mystery that isn't even there. Liminal states of mind are possible, concentration can be trained by repetition. Obsessing over things we can't change makes us unhappy. The real 'truths' of Buddhism are so banal its embarrasing.

>The Bible contains some asceticism so its nihilist
Buddhism is nihilistic in so far as it presents Samsara as encompassing all human desires and Anatta as invalidating the concept of the self. To the extent that it does NOT do this, its weak self help. Christianity is a set of explicit propositions about divine entities and our relationship to them and to eachother.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 11:18:09 2021 No.18712362 >>18711736 >So what is that suffering Just use your fucking imagination lad, it's not hard.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 11:19:07 2021 No.18712367

>>18712276

2/2

>What is more likely, magic scenario A or magic scenario B?
What an inane question

>liberation from eternal recurrence
Maybe you don't reoccur at all. Christianity is superior to Buddhism in its strength of character, but that doesn't make it true. Maybe when you die there's nothing at all. But you'll tell me that you're karmically-approved meditated gave you awareness of Anatta and therefore of Oneness so you can't die. And I'll tell you that losing track of yourself doesn't mean you never existed, and what will happen when you die is the same thing that happens when you go under general anaesthetic. No brain activity. Not even darkness. No place for the darkness to be in. Oblivion. Not Oneness.

Buddhism is snake oil

>True paradox
No its not, because it has no internal logic. Here's a true paradox: "If this sentence is true, then Santa claus exists." Since the articulation of the truth condition is verbally the same as the sentence itself, the truth condition technically obtains, seeming to prove the existence of Santa. You just took a binary - existence and non-existence - and pretended that you can sit in the middle because you meditate.

>Why choose these terms
They are pretty much the only obligatory terms in the universe

>Christian monks and lay buddhists
Christian monks are still pursuing Christian values and concepts. Lay Buddhists are just shittier at being Buddhists.

>Race?
I hope not but maybe

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 11:26:17 2021 No.18712399 >>18711285 Honestly people are going to seethe at you. They probably came from a rich family with everything handed to them on a silver platter, and as such, they cannot understand.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 11:26:34 2021 No.18712402

>>18712288
I meant cuckold fetishism. Clearly not an evolutionary advantage. Clearly the product of a mind that is constructed in a way that makes it not always care about reproducing genes.

>quantum anything
I don't want to invoke that shit but maybe the fact that Newtonian physics work in a quantum world but don't resemble quantum maths is a nice analogy. It breaks down though because there is only one universe, but there are two games: the genes game and the human psychology game

Of course I'm not saying they're fully disconnected. We serve our genes in all sorts of ways. But that does not mean that, if you wrote out the code for a human brain, it would have any deep internal purpose geared towards gene propagation, instead it is the result of a random selection process grabbing any code in the program-space that was near enough for its limited optimising capacity and then running it to gain the indirect benefits of gene propagation when/if said brain code happened to be successful in its environment. You are treating the genes like a computer programmer who designed us for a task. We weren't designed we were accidentally agglomerated from a space of possible programs/configurations. Our true deep psychological purposes are therefore not defined in any necessary/intrinsic way by serving our genes.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 11:28:22 2021 No.18712414 >>18712399 >NPC wants to coddle third worlder even though said third worlder has shown all thread that they don't give a fuck about the suffering of others

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 11:34:18 2021 No.18712440

>>18712361
>>18712367
You have Buddhism derangement syndrome dude, and I have no idea why.

>my wide-ranging, profound and encompassing critique of your shitty pseudo-religion.
You have done none of that in the entire thread. You just seethed.

>And yet if you dilute the buddhist definition of desire to be something like 'harmful obsession' as you've done above
I haven't, and I've asked you to define desire, which you refused to do.

> What you know about Nirvana is what you have experienced of it, which can be explained psychologically just like we explain drug trips.
Yeah, but that's not what Nirvana is. I've made the argument that Nirvana is the escape from the cycle of rebirth. It's not a state of mind, you faggot.

>as it presents Samsara as encompassing all human desires
Define Samsara.

>Anatta as invalidating the concept of the self
There is no self. You do not control your mind, you do not control your emotions, you do not control your desires, you do not control your body (aging, your heartbeat, etc.), and you do not control your emotions. Try to find something within your being that you have complete control over and it will be impossible.

>What an inane question
It's not inane. How you relate to the afterlife defines many aspects of your mindset and behavior.

>what will happen when you die is the same thing that happens when you go under general anaesthetic.
That's something that would be acceptable from a Buddhist perspective. That is the end of suffering.

>No its not, because it has no internal logic.
Yeah, because it's a paradox faggot.

>They are pretty much the only obligatory terms in the universe
Why define Nirvana as neither existence, nor non-existence? Why not define it as non-existence? Why not define it as eternal bliss?

>Christian monks are still pursuing Christian values and concepts.
Not the values that you praised so dearly. They pursue the purely spiritual, just like buddhist monks.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 11:35:40 2021 No.18712448 Why do you torture yourself with miserable ugly thoguhts like >uhh everything sucks everything is bad boohoo There is a way out you know.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 11:42:48 2021 No.18712485

>>18712414
Lmao, and the rich boy from the affluent neighborhood is the truly altruistic arbiter of justice. Because you care for those people suffering much more then he does right? Surely you give a portion of your money to charity, a Christian virtue btw, to alleviate some of their suffering right? Oh wait no, no you dont.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 11:44:17 2021 No.18712498 Christianity is Jewish and semitic, into the garbage can it goes.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:00:30 2021 No.18712571

>>18712402
>Our true deep psychological purposes are therefore not defined in any necessary/intrinsic way by serving our genes.
yes and no,there are always errors because it is imperfect but the underlying goal does exist namely genetic survival .one aspect of our brain and the psyche can impact the other and make it goy haywire.take the the case of dopamine for instance.u can easily screw that up with porn,substances,trying a new way of having sex and possibly developing fetishes in that way or still having the childish aspect in urself and giving u the mommy gf fetish,etc.
we both are saying the same thing except i claim that there is a well defined goal underneath our "psyche"(which is just a product of biology)that can lose its path and u say "Our true deep psychological purposes are therefore not defined in any necessary/intrinsic way by serving our genes" which is simply not the case.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:06:51 2021 No.18712601

>>18712440

1/2

You're just intellectually weak. I started OFF by defining Samsara, defining desire, Nirvana, all of that, and you've been doing nothing but backpedal the entire time, because you are a motte and bailey NPC. You have made no attempt to work with what I posted

>Buddhism derangement
Yeah ppl who disprove your dumb smokeshow are deranged

>try to find something that you have complete control over and you can't, therefore Anatta
Wrong, you continue to rely on gimped definitions of commonly used concepts. The self never NEEDED a proof in the first place, it never needed to be located or pinned down like a bug on an entomologists' display card. If your life, from instant to instant of subjective experience, was laid out in a line like a roll of film negative, that would be you. There would be people who cared about that selfhood, that experiencing entity, that fabric and character and flavour of human subjectivity and its specific history of instants, and then there would be people who didn't give a fuck or who hated you. Buddhists straw man selfhood as if you need to be able to find some homunculus inside yourself for the concept to be valid. Its a diffuse and emergent phenomenon, but a phenomenon none the less, and if you think its not then try not mourning the death of a loved one.

>its not inane
Its inane and I'm an atheist who thinks Christian religion is more noble than retard Buddhism, so there

>Oblivion is the end of Suffering
First of all that means you've defined Samsara as not just pathological desire but ALL desire, since you now apparently consider Oblivion an acceptable alternative to being alive. But even if we go with this yet-another redefinition of yours, it would mean that by your logic you should kill yourself. Oh wait, you can't because your religion has a made up failsafe called reincarnation where if you follow the logical implication of your nihilistic Samsara/Anatta concepts and off yourself you will incur negative 'karma'. How convenient. But the reincarnation thing, apart from making no sense in the light of Anatta, also makes no sense if you accept that death is followed by Oblivion. How the fuck are you being reincarnated if there's no you and Oblivion follows death?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:07:53 2021 No.18712607

>>18712440

2/2

Reincarnation also depends conceptually on the experienced universal Oneness that Buddhists claim to be capable of becoming aware of through meditiation/presence etc on the road to enlightenment. Except this Oneness (really a psychological state of defocusation which can be dismissed out of hand due to Buddhists admitting that it contains no semantic content) is at odds with the fact that identities are real (ie Anatta is a false straw man, see above). It is also at odds with the more noble and humanistic goals of a PROPER religion, like Christianity, where life is more than the great harmonious Kumbaya and there is some real work to be done in actually combating and atoning for the evil that Buddhism callously defines away as 'ignorance'. Disgusting

>
Nirvana either exists or doesn't. It is apparently something you experience. As i've said its an inferior spiritual goal in the first place, even if it exists. And its doubly irrelevant since it has no semantic content beyond "Dude weed nothing matters we're all One"

>pursuing the purely spiritual makes them just like buddhist monks
All religion is pursuit of the spiritual mate. Your religion just does it in a stupid bug way

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:09:59 2021 No.18712619

>>18712485
lol I genuinely laughed at your post. You must be a true barbarian if you assume other people don't give money to charity. It goes out of my account every month you dummy, and I'm not even Christian. In fact that's the whole POINT of this thread - religion is impossible in the fact of the intensity of earthly suffering.

/Lit/ is full of brainlets these days

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:13:47 2021 No.18712640

>>18712601
>>18712607
Such useless posts. I thought we were having a discussion about Buddhist concepts, and I told you what I've read about them and explained how I understood them. Somehow that offended you.

>I'm an atheist
So that's why you're so butthurt. I've left this discussion having learned nothing and mildly confused about what just happened.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:17:15 2021 No.18712665

>>18712571
It literally is though. Take the Fantasia analogy again, which you ignored. You need an agent to do a job. You select an agent whose behaviour seems to fit the bill. Its purposes are actually its own and are beyond your understanding. You have the burden of proof if you want to say that the purpose of gene propagation is in our actually neurological design as opposed to the non-sapient gene process that selected that design via evolution from the space of possible alternatives. The gene purpose only exists at the gene level. At the human level you have your human purpose which is only vaguely isomorphic to gene production.

Besides you acknowledged that the brain can want things that are counter darwinian when you talked about fetishes and porn etc. So you've already acknowledged that what the brain wants and the genes want it is different. All you do after that is go on to say that, in this case, the brain is somehow 'wrong'. Are you a fucking gene typing this, an amino acid? Why the hell do they decide who's 'wrong'? In many ways our genetically propagating behaviours fuck us up and make us unhappy, so what metric of norms are you using?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:19:39 2021 No.18712683
File: 42 KB, 735x420, 218E73FB-BABD-4B25-86EE-CD1AF5C962CB.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Suffering is inextricably bound up with conditioned existence. Impermanence leads one to suffer; identifying as a ‘self’ leads one to suffer (especially in combination with impermanence) and make others suffer. Suffering exists at every level of existence. There is no ‘God’ that created the world nor willed the suffering. Conditioned existence simply occurs, through Karma, and by cultivating the conditions for further existence you are prolonging your rebirths in a realm permeated by suffering. We don’t have to justify and learn to live with suffering, we can escape it, here and now.
Come home, Indo-aryan man!

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:20:28 2021 No.18712688
File: 17 KB, 400x400, 1613512824413.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>18712640
We were having a discussion about Buddhist concepts until you had nothing left to defend in the utter rubble of your useless, nihilistic, self-contradictory, manipulative, dissembling, fashionable and ignoble religious tradition.

>mildy confused
Well don't worry just go meditate about the guy who just kicked your ass technically doesn't exist. You are the Universe so you just kicked your own ass I suppose.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:22:21 2021 No.18712701
File: 81 KB, 960x958, 1615029017546.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>18712683
lol I know you're the same guy trying to get a last word in for Buddha cucks. What a shameful display. I wonder how many lifetimes you are going to have to spend as a cockroach to get rid of all this itchy bad karma from being shit at argumentation

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:26:24 2021 No.18712718

>>18710907
I believe this makes a faulty assumption that God fired the gun. Standard Christian theology would rephrase it as such: "Why would I hand a man a gun, let him shoot himself, then take him to the hospital? It defeats the purpose of handing him the gun in the first place." Of course, this restatement doesn't hit as hard because, whereas the shooter in the original argument was to blame, and there was absurdity in taking the victim to the hospital, in the theologically accurate example, it's harder to blame the guy that handed the wounded guy the gun to shoot himself. Of course, the counterargument would be "Why hand a gun to a suicidal dude?" and that's a fair response. I would respond by asking "If you can't choose to die, can you choose to live?" I believe suicide is fundamental to Christian doctrine, evident in the fact that Adam + Eve could "commit suicide" by disobeying God. Thus, they could choose life or death. In our existing world, the choice to live or die is more obvious in that I can quite literally kill myself if I reject life. In handing us the means to death, God gave us the key to life. So, to answer the counterargument of "Why hand a gun to a suicidal dude?" I answer "How can you choose life if death was never an option?"

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:30:06 2021 No.18712731

>>18711144
>>18711138
You presuppose that the children are being punished, whereas I would argue they are not being punished. They are simply collateral damage in other people's foolishness, which, keep in mind, these people choose. If I rape a child, is that child being punished for their sin? Of course not. They are simply on the receiving end of MY sin. Sin doesn't always just impact the self, sin can also impact those around me. If I murder someone, it would be silly to say the victim was being punished for their sins. They were simply a victim of my own sin. Ivan's argument about how he can't believe in God if even a single child is punished for someone else's sins is built upon the presupposition that all pain is punishment, which ignores causality. Actions have consequences; evil actions [often] have evil consequences. This does not just mean divine consequence that if you do evil, you go to hell, but that if you do evil, bad things happen in THIS world to yourself and others [usually].

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:36:28 2021 No.18712777

>>18712731
No, Ivan never says that pain is punishment. He's saying that if God is building towards something worthwhile, but the build nevertheless requires the unavenged and incomprehensible suffering of even one innocent child, then Ivan, being a morally sane person (and possessing a limited human mind as opposed to God's mind) cannot understand or endorse Creation. It can't be worth it. A human mind could not concieve of a way for it to be worth that. For that to be neccessary and indispensible. So he nopes out. As should you

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:40:29 2021 No.18712796

>>18712701
Not the same guy, didn’t realize there was a debate going on until I posted.
I noticed a couple glaring issues in your posts. Have you read the Pali canon, by any chance? Nirvana isn’t ‘oblivion’, that would be annihalationism. The Buddha declares a middle way between eternalism and annihalationism. Second, you can’t just ‘off yourself’ to escape samsara, because the killing of any kind generates negative karmic potential, and suicide only conditions your continued existence in the round of rebirths.
But anyway, arguing is pointless. I can’t explain to you why nirvana is true escape, why buddhism is true and not just nihilism, etc. The Buddha himself could not (and would not) explain certain things, he preached a spiritual empiricism. You can try meditating, and truly discover the nature of impermanence, for starters. Don’t underestimate spiritual practice.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:42:06 2021 No.18712807

>>18711223
I reject the premise. Evil is the lack of good, much in the same way coldness is the lack of heat, not its own type of energy. Which then raises the issue of >>18711232 and the devil. If evil is the lack of good, and is powerless, how is there evil? Christian theology understands that God is eternal and yet does not take it to its logical conclusion to tie up some of these loose ends we have. First, if God is pre-existent and create space + time (which is what Christians believe), then that means God is beyond time. Thus, if God is eternal, from our perspective He is also instant: time is essentially meaningless. Some Christians don't understand when I say this, but I don't just mean that time moves slower for God, but that it simply isn't a thing. God is unchanging because He cannot: there is no passage of time. God that walks with Adam and speaks with Abraham is that God that died on the Cross and the one that listens to prayers now. It is all instantaneous: it isn't as if God "remembers" talking with Abraham, rather, He is completely aware of that taking place thousands of years ago AS He involves Himself with us now. How does this notion of God being instant AND eternal help us? Well, we can assume that angels/demons, existing in the "heavenly" realm, are also exempt from time: the spiritual is not bound by physical spacetime. Thus, if the devil rebelled against God, it stands to reason that the effects for him would be instantaneous, but for us would not be instantaneous. In Revelation, we see the devil defeated. In Genesis, we see the devil tempting and "winning" in the sense that he messed up Creation. Although we have a timeline, and place one at the beginning and one at the end, for an instantaneously eternal God, these events (the devil's rebellion and the devil's defeat) would occur simultaneous, for no one could stand against God. If shadow was placed in the presence of light, it would be wiped away in the next instant. While from our time-oriented perspective, there is a chain of events, and we interpret everything as such, it would be silly to assume God is doing the same. How does the powerless devil do anything? Because that instant of shadow, although wiped out immediately in the spiritual, is not bound by time, and may act in all areas of time. That shadow exists for an instant, capable of touching the entire timeline, and yet is wiped out the next. Does that get rid of pain? Of course not. Would I autistically rant about time to a woman grieving? Of course not. Does it use God's eternality and the transcendence of the spirit to answer how evil, as powerless as it is, can exist? I believe so.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:43:36 2021 No.18712814 >>18712777 And if I reject your assumption that God is building to something specifically with suffering children? I can assert that God is generally acting without His specific use of a suffering child.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:49:47 2021 No.18712848

>>18712665
>You have the burden of proof if you want to say that the purpose of gene propagation is in our actually neurological design as opposed to the non-sapient gene process that selected that design via evolution from the space of possible alternatives. The gene purpose only exists at the gene level. At the human level you have your human purpose which is only vaguely isomorphic to gene production.
again u're just repeating what u and i had said b4 except for the last part.the nervous sytem was selected by evolution because it helped to ensure our genetic survival.just look at the evolutionary history of life and the development of nervous system if u want a proof of that .

>Besides you acknowledged that the brain can want things that are counter darwinian when you talked about fetishes and porn etc. So you've already acknowledged that what the brain wants and the genes want it is different. All you do after that is go on to say that, in this case, the brain is somehow 'wrong'.
i just it has room for errors and is not perfect.i'll reiterate the dopamine system again.its very useful for goal seeking which worked really well for the most of our evolutionary history but that does not mean its free of flaws.look at modern society that takes the full advantage of the dopaminergic system's weakness by feeding it with porn,vidya ,alcohol,drugs, hyper stimulation ,etc.this is an example where our biology is not completely free of flaws.
>Are you a fucking gene typing this, an amino acid?
yes and no.yes because all of our biology has the underlying genetic element to it and no because all u get to see is my hands typing which innturn is controlled by my brain which inturn is a manifestiion of the genes in me.
>Why the hell do they decide who's 'wrong'?
i don't get u.did u mean "why do genes decide what is right and wrong?"
>In many ways our genetically propagating behaviours fuck us up and make us unhappy, so what metric of norms are you using?
well if u have genes that predispose u to certain ailments u're going to be unhappy.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 12:59:32 2021 No.18712888
File: 306 KB, 1365x2048, Aleosha.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>18712796
You didn't notice mistakes you simply didn't read carefully enough. My Buddhist opponent was the one who said that post-death oblivion was not incompatible with his Buddhism. We also covered why the concept of karma is a shell game and why Buddhism is indeed a nihilistic canard. Buddha may have practiced 'spiritual empiricism' but here in the West we practised actual empiricism and it turns out that the only thing meditation provably trains is defocusation.

>discover the nature of impermanence
Lol like I haven't covered that already. Buddhist arrogance is literally endemic. But that only makes sense in a religion of negation and shirked responsibility.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:02:05 2021 No.18712903

>>18712683
Based. All of anicca (impermanence), dukkha (suffering/dissatisfaction), and anatta (non-self) can be found in the act of breathing. The body must breathe or it will suffer. The body will die, and someday take its final breath. Each breath involves an inner change, and reflect a constantly evolving mind that operates under the delusion of self. The only thing that is ‘us’ apart from our physical appearance is how minds have conditioned the connection of concepts. Those pattern of thought, woven through experience to constitute who you are, is in the end just a garment and will fade with time.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:05:58 2021 No.18712923

>>18712814
He did this whole thing and knew what it would be. You don't get to reject the assumption without rejecting his omnipotence/omniscience

>inb4 but humans are the sinners
God made all this happen and innocent babies were tortured to death in his plan

>>18712848
I'll be honest, I'm getting a real ESL vibe from you and this simple concept is not reaching you. You seem to not understand that I already grokked that humans were created by an evolutionary process, but that I have gone the necessary conceptual step beyond that to configure the space of human purposes and drives that are not gene centric. You may need to find a more remedial forum, or just write down your useless opinions on some toilet paper and flush it down the shitter

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:07:26 2021 No.18712929 >>18712903 a true midwit

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:10:00 2021 No.18712938 >>18710886 Just read any account from ISIS sex slaves. Or young blokes sent to New Guinea during WW2. There's your examples.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:12:01 2021 No.18712950 >>18710906 >he doesn't believe at all. Correct, I don't. I have tried God, but I spat him out

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:14:57 2021 No.18712963

>>18712923
>I'll be honest, I'm getting a real ESL vibe from you and this simple concept is not reaching you. You seem to not understand that I already grokked that humans were created by an evolutionary process, but that I have gone the necessary conceptual step beyond that to configure the space of human purposes and drives that are not gene centric. You may need to find a more remedial forum, or just write down your useless opinions on some toilet paper and flush it down the shitter
dude u're just dumb and i suspect u to have low functioning autism if u're not able to understand what genetic survival is and how it manifests in our lives.
>Why the hell do they decide who's 'wrong'?
going by my initial understanding of what u'd asked,genes don't decide what is good or bad.they simply can't do that.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:15:13 2021 No.18712965 >>18712950 based phrasing >>18712938 New Guinea WWII, do you mean the Kokoda Trail stuff?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:20:18 2021 No.18712990

>>18712963
You keep embarrassing yourself. I've continually demonstrated that I understand natural selection and evolutionary psychology. From the very beginning of the thread I have been talking about taking the next conceptual step beyond that incredibly basic premise.

>going by my initial understanding of what u'd asked,genes don't decide what is good or bad.they simply can't do that.
You completely missed the point I was making, which is that you were failing to distinguish between your own agency and that of your genes.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:21:33 2021 No.18712996

>>18712965
>do you mean the Kokoda Trail stuff?
No, I just referred to the extreme suffering both sides went through there in general. Extreme physical fatigue, starvation, sickness, warfare, torture, that kind of stuff. That kind of suffering was not unique to the theatre, it was just extreme there.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:23:04 2021 No.18713008

>>18712990
>I've continually demonstrated that I understand natural selection and evolutionary psychology
sure you do .
>You completely missed the point I was making, which is that you were failing to distinguish between your own agency and that of your genes.
that immediately gets into the realm of defining 'I'.if u can't even identify this simple problem u can unironically kys.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:27:38 2021 No.18713041

>>18713008
No it literally has nothing to do with the definition of 'I'. How are you still incapable of abstractly conceiving of gene selection and psychology as separate optimisation processes. You have the grasping, misfiring vibe that I get from idiots in real life

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:31:08 2021 No.18713066

>>18713041
>No it literally has nothing to do with the definition of 'I'. How are you still incapable of abstractly conceiving of gene selection and psychology as separate optimisation processes. You have the grasping, misfiring vibe that I get from idiots in real life
i said it to u b4 and u can't grasp that.is it my fault pal?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:33:27 2021 No.18713076 >>18713066 Your entire effort in this thread has been to deny that they are meaningfully separate processes, so don't now attempt to pretend that you get it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:36:45 2021 No.18713097 >>18713076 all i 've ever tried to say was our entire biological system is built in an hierarchy and nothing more with genetic survival having the highest precedence and everything else branching from it.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:45:30 2021 No.18713144

>>18713097
And i've been saying that the conditions for our selection linked to but not the same as the deep structure of our psychology. We know what evolutionary purpose our psychology serves but not what its actual design/code is. Otherwise we would be able to build an AGI.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 13:57:47 2021 No.18713201

>>18713144
>We know what evolutionary purpose our psychology serves but not what its actual design/code is. Otherwise we would be able to build an AGI.
understanding the neuroscience and genetics behind it is one thing and getting the overall picture is another (which is just genetic survival).

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 14:00:16 2021 No.18713209 >>18713201 Picture of the evolutionary environment =/= picture of the mind design

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 14:04:44 2021 No.18713224 >>18713209 wtf,i never said that

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 14:10:29 2021 No.18713251 >>18713224 >still misunderstands It's MY thesis, not yours mate

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 14:17:38 2021 No.18713279 >>18713251 that is obvious and should not have been part of the debate .but everything is a mesh with underlying goal being genetic survival. nigga i'm getting sick and tired with this quarrel .

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 14:20:30 2021 No.18713296 >>18713279 >wtf I never said that >that is obvious lel

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 14:23:25 2021 No.18713304

>>18712731
>If I rape a child, is that child being punished for their sin?
The point is that there is so much suffering and pain which is not the fault of any person. Reality itself is set up so that some children develop horrific conditions like bone cancer and die excruciating deaths at a young age. God's creation contains this when there is no reason whatsoever for it to exist. Same with all kinds of parasites whose entire life cycle is to infect a person and destroy them from the inside out. Why would a loving God chose to create such things? Why would a loving God allow his creation to continue in a state so permeated with intense suffering where the suffering is so randomly and arbitrarily distributed?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 14:26:42 2021 No.18713322 >>18713304 Well said. Someone gets it

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 14:29:26 2021 No.18713336

>>18711417
Anon, you're attributing ill intent to me wrongly. I am genuinely concerned for your mental health. I am engaging in a conversation with you precisely because I think it can have a beneficial effect on both of us. Isn't there some verse about man sharpening man as iron sharpens iron? Have you perhaps lost your edge?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 14:32:20 2021 No.18713352

>>18711406
Please lay out how rejecting the dogmatic preachings of a group of people who engage in bizarre rituals is in any way "cult-like"
>>18711457
I have given my reasons for non-belief. They are not received "feelings" of a being "calling" me as is the case for the other anon.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 17:08:20 2021 No.18714163 >>18713304 Why do you ignore Christ, sent to redeem us from this? What is a little more pain compared to eternal life? Life sucks for me right now, but I know in the end every tear will be wiped away, including my own tears.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 17:55:20 2021 No.18714394

>>18714163
This is the essence of sadomasochism. Small children are meant to endure horrific suffering and are expected to love the being responsible for it? To justify the needless pain and agony by some future reward? This is a mockery of morality. Eternal life does not justify the suffering inflicted on the innocent.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 18:00:22 2021 No.18714415 >>18714163 >"Because I am going to give you an infinite reward, I am entitled to inflict any amount of suffering I want on you in the mean time and you better praise and love me or I might arbitrarily revoke the reward" Christ Cucks never disappoint!

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 18:06:00 2021 No.18714442

>Humans start putting chemicals in food
>Humans smoke -- and don't give a shit about second hand smoke
>Humans pollute the environment
>Humans fuck without strangers without protection
>Humans create garbage food designed to make each other sick (cookies, pies, etc.)
>Humans drink and drive
>"Where's God!"

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 18:44:47 2021 No.18714585 File: 119 KB, 198x359, 1610902464101.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>18714394 >infinite reward doesn't justify finite pain also >innocent sorry no one is innocent sir

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 18:52:13 2021 No.18714624 >>18711242 >When I say God called me to believe, I mean in a spiritual way what do you say about people who uses the same argument for other faiths

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 19:12:43 2021 No.18714721 >>18714585 >Children aren't innocent so it's fine to torture them Some God you've got there.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 19:14:16 2021 No.18714729 >>18714721 >strawman I don't recall ever talking about torturing children.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 19:15:31 2021 No.18714735 >>18711111 Very nice numbers

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 19:19:38 2021 No.18714757 >>18714729 only sacrificing them

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 19:29:29 2021 No.18714802 File: 256 KB, 900x371, 1613962381103.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>18714757 Martyrdom is glorious, even if they don't understand it. God's smallest whims are much greater than Man's greatest goals.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 19:32:08 2021 No.18714815 >>18714802 than why did he lower himself to the shape of man?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 19:33:48 2021 No.18714825

>>18714815
He didn't lower Himself: to assume that Christ's divine nature and human nature mixed is heretical. Christ was fully God and fully Man, without diminishing His glory.
"to the shape of man" implies that His body was either a container for "Godness" or a façade, both also heresies.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 19:37:05 2021 No.18714837 >>18714825 isn't God all there is? How could something fully divine be equaly fully man

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 19:37:54 2021 No.18714840 >>18714837 What do you mean by "isn't God all there is?" Is that in reference to everything, or in reference to Jesus?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 19:38:37 2021 No.18714846 >jesus cultists out themselves as total pieces of shit Imagine my shock

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 19:41:59 2021 No.18714862 >>18714846 >atheists out themselves as using strawmen to cope Imagine my shock.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 19:44:40 2021 No.18714872 >>18714862 I didn't know strawmen bleed when you stab them

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:00:04 2021 No.18714932 >>18712718 >Calvinists aren’t theologically standard >standard theology is pathetically CoE Well son I can see you aren’t doubly predestined. Kh8n8

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:04:44 2021 No.18714948

>>18714729
Bone cancer in children is torture. It is a result of God's creation, and he has the power to intervene, yet he sees fit to allow it. In fact, he must have known this was going to be the outcome of creation at the start, and he decided to torture these children anyway. Your attempts to excuse these excesses of horror reveal just how depraved you are. "God is good so the suffering of children must be good". By justifying such suffering, you out yourself for what you are, wicked.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:06:23 2021 No.18714951 >>18714802 >Forcing children to be martyrs is good because God This is your mind on religion

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:10:57 2021 No.18714964 so uh atheists what's your justification for kids dying? you seem to be seething a lot of God so is it possible you do believe in God?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:15:18 2021 No.18714976
File: 2.03 MB, 480x270, 1625424207864.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

A belief in an all-good God in a universe that isn't all-good is inherently inhuman. Gnostics have found a solution to this problems thousands of years ago and eternally BTFO'd all other Christians (till they seethed enough to destroy their teachings) by acknowledging that the Supreme God is in fact all that there is in the world: both Good and Evil. God created the world and he dictates absolutely everything in it down to the tiniest minutia, because he's a hands-on deity who is both omnipotent and omniscient. There is evil in the world. Therefore God is evil. But there is also good in the world too. Therefore God is good.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:24:38 2021 No.18715006

Its been 12 hours and the atheists are still sperging about children dying. Omg life includes suffering! It should all be good!
It shows they themselves have the mental and emotional limitations of a child.

>bbut you must love it when children die of bone cancer and so does your God!
What an absolutely cheap argument. I'll pull a similar card,
>if a child was dying of bone cancer, would you continue to let them suffer or put them out of their misery?
You lose either way with your cheap 2010 tier twitter atheist arguments.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:26:08 2021 No.18715016

>>18714976
>Gnostics have found a solution to this problems thousands of years ago
Gnostics found nothing. Each sect has entirely different beliefs.

>by acknowledging that the Supreme God is in fact all that there is in the world: both Good and Evil
This isnt even what gnostics taught. Stop posting stupid cat.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:26:37 2021 No.18715018 >>18715006 And yet 12 hours later, the only reply you could muster is: >don't care lol And your ass' creed is supposed to be moral arbiter of the world? Lmao

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:28:45 2021 No.18715031 >>18715016 Wrong on both accounts.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:29:55 2021 No.18715037 >>18710898 but interfering in life and death isn't gods plan gods plan is clearly for them to die

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:33:39 2021 No.18715061

>>18715018
Ive already given my reply. Not my fault you let emotions control you like a woman.
So will you answer my question or not?

>if a child was dying of bone cancer, would you continue to let them suffer or put them out of their misery?
And what is your reason for children having to suffer so in an atheistic world?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:34:30 2021 No.18715064 >>18714951 >not wanting children to avoid suffering by having them die young I thought utilitarianism was based. >>18714932 >Calvinism lol >>18714872 >>18714948 lol

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:39:53 2021 No.18715089 >>18714442 NOOO YOU CANT SAY THAT ITS STILL GODS FAULT BECAUSE HE DOESNT LET ME POISON MYSELF WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:41:06 2021 No.18715100

>>18715061
oh look it's pulling a "muh based stoicism" kek

>if a child was dying of bone cancer, would you continue to let them suffer or put them out of their misery?
oh you give a shit about the child's suffering now? or did you think disingenuous bad faith argumentation where I'm supposed to be beholden to the results of the argument but you totally aren't are supposed to actually convince you of something? it doesn't matter what the answer is to you, come back when you're not a psychopath

>And what is your reason for children having to suffer so in an atheistic world?
there is no reason. that's the whole point, because there is no imaginary friend in the sky controlling everything. no one's in the pilot seat. matter of fact, there is no pilot seat, it's not even a vehicle. there is no reason for children to suffer, therefore the suffering needs to be minimalised.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:43:44 2021 No.18715118 >>18715089 NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T SAY FATE IS EXPLICITLY A CONSTRUCT GOD CONSCIOUSLY CREATED AND OPERATES

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:54:01 2021 No.18715155 >>18715100 >cant answer my question I accept your surrender. >>18715118 Free will exists. Is it Gods plan for me to call you a faggot? Nah, that was my desire. Just likes its the desire of americans to eat mcdonalds and die of heart attacks.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:56:50 2021 No.18715169

>>18715155
>Free will exists
Not when God has predetermined all of our actions :)
To be honest, I'm not surprised you're so schizophrenic, it takes pure desperation, indoctrination, mental illness, or all three to believe in the three-headed god-beast.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 20:59:29 2021 No.18715181

>>18710909
>>18710898
The vast majority of people who have suffered throughout history have believed some sort of God. I don’t know how people in modern times are so narcissistic that they think it’s some sort of “gotcha” moment to think of moral conundrums like this. Yes, people can stare at dying children and affirm God, because this has already happened all through. Why would it be any different now? A wealthy Westerner like Camus wouldn’t know shit about suffering and pain on the scale of all the Algerian children he supported the persecution of, what gives him the fucking right to pretend like he’s solved all morality?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:00:10 2021 No.18715187 >>18715169 I guess it God's plan for you to make these shit posts then. And then get into a horrible accident and realize the error of your ways and beg for repentance.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:02:16 2021 No.18715198 >>18715187 Good thing a maniac like that who gets a kick out of torturing people so they can crawl to him in desperation for mercy doesn't exist, huh?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:28:47 2021 No.18715344 >>18710886 >God created this world because he wanted me to exist QED

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:43:51 2021 No.18715438
File: 1.14 MB, 720x661, Screen Shot 2021-02-13 at 3.34.25 pm.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>18715006
Calling the argument cheap doesn't answer it.

Your question for atheist 'utilitarians'
>if a child was dying of bone cancer, would you continue to let them suffer or put them out of their misery?

There are a range of responses to rejecting God via the Problem of Evil. You could believe in God but hate Him. You could disbelieve, you could try to change his mind with prayer. You don't have to be a utilitarian. And besides, even if you were, you wouldn't necessarily kill a child with cancer to end their suffering. You might try and save the child's life or ease its final days. You might be unable to take the life or feel that doing so would have some even worse effect. You might even simply respect the will of the child to go on living as long as possible. Maybe you WOULD euthanise and be devastated because you have truly done so out of a sincere concern for the child's best interests in this painful and cosmically indifferent world. Maybe you would have formed an atheistic moral ontology that precludes such acts. Maybe not.

What would be true in ALL cases is that you and the child were put in an untenable and torturous situation by a God whose Plan is either non-existent of morally incomprehensible to humans, by which I mean morally repugnant.

Your argument seems to boil down to either "atheists can't have morality" or "atheists do bad things too" which is frankly pathetic, because atheists, like children, can suffer and grieve and that's all that matters here.

Still awaiting YOUR answer to the question of the thread: How can you consent to be part of a cosmic Plan that involves the (documented historical) torture and death of even one child, let alone the millions of children whose lives were nothing but pain/misery cut short by death?

Were they being morally tested to earn their place in Heaven? Could you tell their mothers that? Were they just set dressing for the moral tests that God was performing on adults? Why should He have let it turn out this way? How can you consent to a world of crib death and kids with bone cancer?

You can't if you are any kind of man.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:48:12 2021 No.18715463

>>18715181
>Camus saying he's solved morality
Didn't happen and irrelevant

>Camus being a Westerner so he can't know about suffering
Cucked, non-sensical, incorrect, irrelevant

>modern people think they are making a new or gotcha argument with this
Incorrect and irrelevant, this thread literally started with referencing a 150 year old book

>People have stared at dying children and affirmed God all throughout history so its fine
Well there it is. Not even "Just coz". You have an argument, you have a reason, and it boils down to "other people do it so I do it."

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:49:19 2021 No.18715472

>>18715438
>How can you consent to be part of a cosmic Plan that involves the (documented historical) torture and death of even one child, let alone the millions of children whose lives were nothing but pain/misery cut short by death?
because I don't care about them, next

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:51:22 2021 No.18715478

>>18715438
Such an eloquent and well thought out reply is wasted on the closed minds of the believers in this thread, but know that I appreciate what you have laid out here.

If a person believes that God's plan is good, and that plan includes children suffering and dying, then they believe that the suffering of children is a good thing. At such a point, a person is so morally corrupted and depraved that there may well be no hope for them.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:52:18 2021 No.18715486 >>18715472 >>18715018 Based Psychopath LARPing as a Christian

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:52:51 2021 No.18715490 >>18715472 Oh look, its a person is so morally corrupted and depraved that there may well be no hope for them.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:53:23 2021 No.18715491 >>18711285 You are a Muslim, aren’t you?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:53:40 2021 No.18715495 >>18715490 please, tell me, are the lives of the people alive today worth more than the ones of tomorrow?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:55:42 2021 No.18715504

>>18715486
Probably some degenerate faggot who did fucked up shit in his life then quickly turned to cucktianity to ease his conscience, but ironically, his moral character only degraded even further from there. Of course he'll justify evil in the name of god, how else will he get into heaven?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:57:09 2021 No.18715510 >>18715495 >An actual, living person >Worth more than a potential person who may or may not exist in the future Huh?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:58:34 2021 No.18715516 >>18715510 I knew my question would be wasted on pretenders. My morality is so above yours that it seems unintelligible. I am closer to God than you are to me btw.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 21:59:14 2021 No.18715518 >>18715516 You know what they say about arrogance and ignorance

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:00:06 2021 No.18715522

>>18711285
>It's incredibly weird to go from atheist to this.

Maybe it’s just the effect of being truly scared and actually near death. There are many highly intelligent individuals who end up becoming religious because they are starting to get old and frail (one example is Aldous Huxley). That has to do more with emotional issues than with cold and passionless logic.

Indeed, your story is actually the model, not the exception. There’s far more religious practice and faith in poor countries and communities, were people suffer more and life is harder. For someone whose life is mostly painful and bitter the alternative of having to deal with all of it being pointless is too much to handle.

I’m sorry for your pain, but at the same time I really think is more an evidence for a bias of yo part than an argument in favor of your vision.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:00:10 2021 No.18715523 >>18715516 you talk exactly like a biblical jew, the kind that Jesus condemned

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:02:06 2021 No.18715525

>>18715518
Consider this very basic premise, I shall attempt to enlighten the dull here. There are 7 billion people alive today. 50 billion will live in the next 200 years. If harming even 6 billion today vastly improves the lives of the next 50 billion (which is actually near infinite in the long run), should we not do so?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:03:48 2021 No.18715530 >>18715525 and you're calling us the utilitarianists, based schizo?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:06:05 2021 No.18715540

>>18715530
Dodge avoid run, that is all you can do in the face of the LORD. Your pathetic morality is plain for all to see. "Oh God is so bad because bad things happen, but I don't care if bad things happen, I just happen to cry about it."
>>18715523
So what? God loves me and I love him.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:06:30 2021 No.18715542 >>18715525 Either you believe the ends justify the means, or you don't. I don't.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:08:09 2021 No.18715551 >>18715540 >but I don't care if bad things happen huh? >>18715472

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:08:26 2021 No.18715553

>>18715478
Its quite banal. The problem with you atheists is you have the emotions of women. Emotions control you intellect. You cant perceive of anything other than 'what gud for me'.
The entire universe must revolve around you having a comfortable and care-free life otherwise God is evil.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:09:41 2021 No.18715556

>>18715542
>Either you believe the ends justify the means, or you don't. I don't.
anyone who says this should have no problem with evil because of the free will exists argument, otherwise the price of happiness is forced slavery
>>18715551
Yeah I was quoting you dumb dumb, not me. This is what I meant by attempting to enlighten, it is clear that you forgot I was explaining a line of logic about why your position was retarded.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:10:46 2021 No.18715559 Americans crying about babies dying, "how can there be a God!" You'd do well to travel to some worse off parts of the world where people know nothing but suffering and see how their faith remains stable.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:11:13 2021 No.18715562 >>18715556 So you criticize me by saying I don't actually care about the suffering of others, but then admitted yourself a few posts ago that you don't care either. You are a schizophrenic with a bible.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:12:00 2021 No.18715568 >>18715562 Truly, truly, I meant it when I said you were stupid.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:12:56 2021 No.18715570 >>18715568 I wasn't joking about you being schizophrenic either. You are thoroughly mentally degraded. Your grey matter is absolute mush.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:14:03 2021 No.18715577 >>18715556 >because of the free will exists argument, Is it your position that because free will exists, children get bone cancer?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:15:08 2021 No.18715578 >>18715577 Yeah, your DNA is what controls you and it has the free will to mutate

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:16:10 2021 No.18715581 >>18715578 >DNA has free will Oh no, you're not one of those Deepak Chopra types, are you?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:17:19 2021 No.18715584 >>18715578 Cells have individual minds of their own now LMAO the sheer schizophrenia of this degenerate cuck

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:19:12 2021 No.18715592

>>18715581
>Deepak Chopra
I do not know who that is, but I am a biochemist and everything that happens in your body originated from a signal in the nucleus, including your thoughts.
>>18715584
I have already judged you as not worthy of higher reason, stop replying to me. If you prove you understand the hypothetical I will continue talking to you.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:19:14 2021 No.18715593 >>18715578 >going full pseudoscience mixed with corrupted views of the christian faith just so you don't reflect on yourself

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:20:16 2021 No.18715597 >>18715592 So children subconsciously will themselves into having bone cancer?

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:21:05 2021 No.18715601

>>18715559
dont bother as they can only see through the lens of cushy western life. from the perspective of someone else, their child dying of sids may be less painful than watching them die of starvation or even worse in the aftermath of bomb raids by american military forces.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:21:34 2021 No.18715605 >>18715597 No, I am a determinist, but someone who believes in free will must accept cancer if they also accept evolution, since both occur from the same thing.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 22:47:53 2021 No.18715713

>>18711093
God is the sum total of all experience and from whence all experience originates. You have childishly taken the presence of suffering as evidence of God's absence or his malevolence, yet what if suffering has a purpose for the totality of existence? These children born into 'doomed lives of pain' do they not learn through their suffering? Do they not thus grow? Do the people who love them not learn powerful lessons, as painful as they may be? In the next life, the pain is gone, but the growth remains.
Your perspective is that of a lazy, fat child crying because lifting weights and running on a treadmill is 'hard'. "Bohooo I feel sick and sore! I wanna lie down! Why does God have to make health so hard and unenjoyable?'.
You take the lowly human perspective - that of focusing on the material and temporary suffering- and ignore the higher possibilities connected with such a state.
Why do you take suffering as proof of no God? Why do you not tease out the possibilities of a higher purpose attached to such suffering? That God offers souls, themselves fragmental aspects of infinity, the opportunity to learn and to grow and thus approach the creator and reunification through improvement of the soul? Is that not an opportunity that a soul would jump at?
Most of the shitty circumstances in life are the direct result of human free will. The rest a result of physical laws and random chance (getting struck by lightning, falling off a cliff, etc) - Do you blame God when a kid get's struck by a bolt of lightning too? or only when they die in cancer wards?
Your vision of God and what he 'should' provide -Being a meatsack in a world of pleasure completely free from the catalyst of suffering- sounds naive and boring.

Anonymous Sat Jul 24 23:13:28 2021 No.18715820

>>18715713
>Children are tortured because of choices they made and they benefit from it even if all they know in their short lives is pain and death

>God is not responsible for 'random chances' like cancer and lightning strike

>Trust the Plan, God is not a sicko because I said so

You may be my least favourite person that I've ever met on 4chan.

>inb4 strawman
Actually no, the burden of proof lies heavily on YOUR shoulders. If the entirety of world history contains even ONE example of a child whose short life amounted uncomprehend suffering/torture followed by death, then YOU are the one who has to endorse that life for the sake of God's Plan. YOU are the one who must consent to build to edifice on the little bruised corpse.

And to say that it will all be made up for in the end is ridiculous, firstly because you are saying that as a human, and no morally sane human could ever contemplate the neccessity of child torture, and secondly because you have no evidence for the goodness of God but the world He created with his infinite power, and from the infinity of alternatives he chose to maim that child.

That is the case against you, except that it is even stronger, for the wrongful suffering of humans and animals goes far beyond these extreme cases with children. The cases with children are simply the ones that can't be glibly handwaived with 'Free Will' and 'Choices' and 'Learning our Lesson'.

If God is, as you say, the "total sum of experience" then he is a total nutbag, an asshole, and also very much a victim of the savage garden that He created.

You are also straw manning badly. No one said anything about a world of only pleasure, that concept may or may not be defensible. What God has offered us instead is a world of mostly senseless pain.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 25 00:10:55 2021 No.18716062 >>18715713 >Children get bone cancer for their own good Now THAT is a hot take. Morally sick and twisted, but a hot take none the less.

Anonymous Sun Jul 25 00:18:01 2021 No.18716095

>>18715820
I go to the dentist and experience discomfort and an outright degree of moderate pain at times. But it is entirely tolerable and serves my health in future. If creation contained only this type of pain, there wouldn't be a problem, but what other anons don't seem to grasp is that the totality of certain terminally ill children is pure suffering and early death. The believer attempts to justify this by inventing future lives, but when faced with the actual reality of such a child, there is no argument. This type of reality is incompatible with any loving or just God.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 25 00:38:00 2021 No.18716203 >>18716095 Agreed. The Christcucks have made an absolutely terrible showing in this thread

Anonymous Sun Jul 25 00:43:37 2021 No.18716237

>>18716203
I disagree. The atheists in this thread have proven that they are lesser beings only concerned with a comfortable and pleasurable life (entirely a result of living in the west, those in third world countries dont share your sentiments), unable in anyway to comprehend something greater than the body their soul is imprisoned in.
Further more, how could good ever be known without the experience of suffering?

Anonymous Sun Jul 25 00:52:24 2021 No.18716272

>>18711142
being short will actually be a strong genetic advantage in the near future since short people are much better at regulating their body temperature and withstanding warm climates. I imagine as the climate changes the average height will change with it. And not to mention the Romans conquered almost all of modern day Europe and its not as though Italians are known for their height.

Anonymous Sun Jul 25 00:52:46 2021 No.18716277

>>18716237
Yet more strawmanning, as if you haven't read even the last 10 posts let alone the thread.

Suffering as character-building =/= babies being tortured by their PCP tweaker mothers and dumped in a bin to die

You are a monster for glibly trying to justify a cruel world. Your waffle about 1st World vs 3rd World is meaningless. The third world does not have a monopoly on suffering, and even if they did they would not get to decide how other people feel about it. They have a greater tendency towards religion but that does not make them correct. Nor can anyone, 3rd worlder or otherwise take it upon themselves to excuse the suffering of innocent children as a cosmic necessity. Nor do I accept that, given the chance, they would take this position. YOU take this position because you are a creep, and i don't care where you are from. You don't have any special authority and you are a cretin - both for failing to take suffering seriously and for attempting to erect some kind of absurd moral high ground based on the unfounded assumption that we are either wealthy or soft or concerned with the absolute and total elimination of discomfort. There is no substance to your post and a good deal of evident deceitfulness.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 25 00:57:22 2021 No.18716295 >>18716277 Remember those babies never got to profess christ consciously and are so in hell.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 25 01:01:36 2021 No.18716315 >>18716237 >Being concerned about the unjust and unnecessary suffering of children makes you a lesser being I want nothing to do with what you consider "greater beings"

Anonymous Sun Jul 25 01:14:19 2021 No.18716368

>>18716277
The only one strawmanning in this thread is you anon, claiming that Christians love to see children be tortured and raped.
All of your arguments are disingenuous and you have no desire to consider other opinions.
I suggest you go ask some refugees from war in the middle east if losing their children in bomb raids challenged their faith in God.

Again, everything you say is from the perspective of a spoiled westerner. Pathetic.

>>18716315
See what I mean about disingenuous arguments....

Anonymous Sun Jul 25 01:38:24 2021 No.18716445
File: 1.69 MB, 2803x3515, 1618743866005.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>18716368
>No desire to see other perspectives
Yet you are saying that as a 'spoiled Westerner' I can never understand, despite the fact that I've directly addressed this feeble non-argument.

Also you are the one advocating a dogmatic religion, not me.

I didn't say you liked the torture, I charged you with endorsing it. Since we are giving in to our prejudices let me say that you come across as a typical midwit Christ cuck, self righteous, cognitively limited, and smugly selective in your replies. 300 posts and not a single one of you happy clappers answered the Ivan Karamazov question directly, despite the fact that myself and others repeatedly phrased and re-phrased it to you. Your clumsy assumptions about your opponents, which form the entirety of your contribution to the discussion, are also clear evidence that your mind paints in brushstrokes too broad for real philosophy. You can't make the big arguments if you repeatedly fail to understand the question. Words like 'strawmanning' therefore have no meaning when you use them. Your reading comprehension or your personal integrity just aren't up to the job of defending your hideous 'faith'

Anonymous Sun Jul 25 02:05:44 2021 No.18716520

>>18716445
>I didn't say you liked the torture, I charged you with endorsing it
Which is equally as incorrect a take, as I dont endorse it and I still considering the suffering to be truly painful. The suffering just isnt all in vain.

You go from calling people schizophrenics, to claiming they love baby torture, to saying they endorse it.
Really anon you should just stick with your retarded rock arguments.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 25 02:15:12 2021 No.18716548 >>18716272 the roman military loved recruiting tall and masculine men

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 25 02:32:08 2021 No.18716587 >>18716520 endorsing God is endorsing his Plan. Pedantry won't save you here. >the suffering isn't all in vain Endorsement. Sicko

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 25 03:38:24 2021 No.18716761 >>18710886 >Ivan Karamazov Who?

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 25 04:13:06 2021 No.18716876 >>18716520 You didn't even address half of what he said in his post, and even the part you selected out, you had nothing interesting to say. You truly are the embodiment of a midwit pseud

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 25 04:15:53 2021 No.18716882 >>18716876 Nothing to say as its already been covered and anon only cares in misrepresenting posts to suit his idea of Christians being evil.

Anonymous Sun Jul 25 08:29:48 2021 No.18717562

>>18716295
nta but such hardline beliefs about hell aren't universal, especially outside of prots. what hell or heaven is exactly is much more ambiguous in orthodoxy and there's enough room for a scholar like david bentley hart to write a completely non-dual argument about hell

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 25 09:15:12 2021 No.18717688 >>18715592 >but I am a biochemist and everything that happens in your body originated from a signal in the nucleus, including your thoughts. Fuckboff, man. I'm a chemist too. Don't use that to excuse your shitty opinion

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature